Timelines in a Patent that Claims a Method

A picture is worth a thousand words.  Various figures may be included in a patent application for aiding the  description of the invention.  In a patent application claiming a control system method or process, a flow chart showing the steps of the method is usually necessary.  In addition to the flow chart, it may be beneficial to include a timeline figure illustrating the operation of the actuators and/or sensors, and the change in parameters when implementing the method.
Though there may be some overlap of coverage between the flow chart and the timeline, the two figures are complimentary to each other, and may be utilized during prosecution to aid the application from different perspectives.  For example, the flow chart may emphasize the actions, such as the action of opening a valve, turning on a component, or reading a sensor, while the timeline may emphasize the other aspects of the action, such as increased air flow responsive to the opened valve.  The flow chart may emphasize the sequence of the steps, while the timeline may emphasize of the timing of the steps.  The flow chart may be used to delineate various embodiments of the method, while the timeline may be used to show a specific embodiment that can achieve certain advantages.  
When drawing a timeline, it is important that each axis of the timeline is defined as complete as possible.  If possible, information such as the range of the values, zero value, and the trend of changes (increasing or decreasing) should be clearly marked on the axis. This information may become important to overcome some unforeseen prior art or rejections constructed based on the broad interpretations by patent examiners or defendants in litigation.  For example, when claiming closing the valve positioned in a coolant passage, an Examiner may interpret the valve to be either completely closed with no coolant flow through, or partially closed with decreased coolant flow rate.  If timelines showing the value of coolant flow rate and the valve position are included in the application, the claim may be amended and clarified based on the timeline.
So, when preparing your patent application, consider including timelines of system methods and operation as they might make the difference in the end.



Popular posts from this blog

Surprising Uses for Oobleck

Image
Oobleck is a common name for a non-Newtonian fluid comprising cornstarch and water. Named after a substance humorously described in Dr. Seuss’s classic children’s story, Bartholomew and the Ooblek, the cornstarch and water concoction is frequently used in children’s science classes as a fun way to learn about fluid mechanics. You may have fond memories, yourself, of playing with oobleck as a youth. Oobleck behaves as a fluid when touched gently, but becomes hard as a solid when hit with great velocity. For example, a person could run across a swimming pool of oobleck without getting their feet wet. However, if a person stood still on the oobleck, then they would slowly sink. Because oobleck is a children’s plaything and because of its simple recipe (cornstarch and water), one may be surprised to learn that inventors have attempted to patent serious industrial uses for the material. As an example, one current patent application, US 2015/0016885 (now abandoned), is for a system of fi...
Read more

Dispensing with the Formalities: Ex Parte Quayle Actions

Image
Checking my email after work one day, I was greeted with some unfortunate news: the application I was prosecuting had received yet another Office action.   Frustrated, I couldn’t resist skimming the substance of the rejection.   After all, like any patent practitioner, I thought my arguments were pretty irrefutable.   The news only got worse… or so it appeared.   The Office action was something called an “ Ex Parte Quayle action.”   Having never received one of these actions, I started mentally preparing myself to pull out the MPEP and research some arcane rejection. To my surprise, I didn’t find myself knee-deep in case law the following day.   Ex Parte Quayle actions, while somewhat inconvenient, are far from insurmountable.   In short, an Ex Parte Quayle action or “Quayle action” is issued when an application has objections remaining as to formal matters, but is otherwise allowable.   Accordingly, the mailing of these actions close...
Read more

Adaptive Headlight IP

Image
The recent Infrastructure bill signed into law by President Biden affects many things, but one aspect that affects the automotive world is adaptive headlights.  As noted by Jalopnik puts it somewhat crudely, this means “our headlights will suck way less” (link to https://jalopnik.com/finally-our-headlights-will-suck-way-less-1848067412 ). But with this sudden change, adaptive headlights in the US may be in for a particular messy IP situation since many companies may have considered it was not necessary to protect their adaptive headlight innovations in the US because of the 50-year old rule preventing such technology. Recent patents in the field from applicants such as Lumileds and Arex indicate that smaller players and startups may be able to break into the market which is expected to explode in the next few years once the final rules are implemented.  For those in the industry that have typically avoided US patent filings in the adaptive headlamp area, they may want to r...
Read more