Good Patent Firm

clarkla...

Quote

nocsysop

Well, adding embodiments that my end up with protection when you didn?t technically conceive of them is adding value in my book.  

It?s funny.  You can pay $10K to a firm that will just take your disclosure and write it up or you can go to someone who will actually add to your disclosure.

So am I sure this is what they did?  Well, yes I am!

clarkla...

Quote

JSonnab...

Patent Prosecutor has said some scary stuff.  Based on his description of patent-professionals.com, I'd steer clear.  

Patent Prosecutor, care to give us a serial number for your application?  That way we can confirm you actually used them and aren't merely a shill.

- Jeff

sammykn...

The PO works for patent professionals and attempted to advertise for them because they are new, however, it went very wrong.   I would bet my life that the PO does not provide you with an application/granted patent number.   I have not checked, but my guess is they will not come up on the USPTO website under granted or published apps.

TataBox...

3K, which includes USPTO fees, is a pretty decent price.  


Regards,

IP4me

Wow.  A lot of hating on this board.  First, I work there so let me straighten some things out about Patent Professionals LLC.  Patent Prosecutor, I don?t know who you are but thank you for the kind words.  We serve hundreds of individual inventors who are tired of paying $10K in fees for a single nonprovisional utility patent application.  Second, that price was only an introductory price for new customers who were also individual inventors.  Currently, it is about $2K higher than this price ? which is still a great deal!

Now for the hating.  Isaac, if you don?t know why the named inventor ends up with any ?added value? we put into the patent, I think you need to relearn the law about idea ownership and employer and employee relationships, as well as basic contract law.  Adding value to an application is what all patent practitioners should be doing, especially those like yourself that probably charge $10K in individuals. Otherwise, you are little more than a glorified secretary regurgitating what the inventor spits out and converting it to legalese.  I admit, we do charge corporation much more, but that is because we have the skills, credentials, and experience to do so.

And as for JSonnabend, I would stay clear of SonnabendLaw out of Brooklyn for the simply reason that you don?t even know when patent applications become published.  Even if Patent Prosecutor wanted to, you wouldn?t have access to his application yet.  I have not checked, but I bet both JSonnabend and sammyknows are not even registered practitioners, or if they are registered, are perfect examples of why the PTO should make practitioners re-register.  As for work samples, there are plenty on our site if you bothered to look before disrespecting a very good and well respect firm:

http://www.patent-professionals.com/index.php?page=experience

Let?s see, Hewlett-Packard, Texas Instruments, IBM, Halliburton. Wow we serve some great clients.  Let me tell you why - we know what we are doing and provide a great value for our clients.  Let?s look at JSonnabend?s clients from their website - Classy Kid, Point-X Corporation, Pancake Programming.  Wow let me tell you why you don?t have great clients - you charge too much, probably produce low quality work, and probably need to go back to law school.

And yes, Patent Professionals LLC does provide high quality patents at great rates.  In fact, most of our practitioners have over 5 years of experience (I only have 3) and are graduates from Stanford or Berkeley.  So JSonnabend before you start disrespecting my firm, I suggest you go back to your Tier 3 law school and ask for a refund.

[Tata - thank you too for the kind words.]

PA

Wow, are we in grade school again?  IP4me, you would have been better off just relying on just the facts. Unfortunately, the insults just make you and your firm look worse.  

Whether intended or not, Patent Prosecutor comes off as a shill in his/her post.  Some of the reactions to Patent Prosecutor, while a bit harsh, don't seem out of the ordinary.  As for Isaac's question, how was that hating?  Oversensitive a bit?

Myth Bu...

I'm guessing IP4me is indeed the OP on this thread.

In any event, I copied the below misinformation directly from the website provided by the OP. So here is some meat for the dog pit:

"A provisional patent application does not in itself afford legal protection to its holder nor does it receive substantive examination by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Once filed with the USPTO, however, a provisional patent application prevents all others who conceive of the invention after the filing date of the provisional patent application from obtaining patent protection. Thus, a provisional patent application effectively locks in your filing date and excludes those who may conceive of your invention after this filing date."

So, IP4me, can you tell us what is wrong with the above quote?

Do you have any other suggestions for us regarding further education?

There are other message threads on this website where you can get more accurate information about provisional patent applications.

Myth Buster

JimIvey

I'll offer just a few thoughts....

I have two issues with the quote re provisional applications.  The first is one about which I'm uncertain and for which I don't care to look up laws/rules right now.  Does a provisional block others from getting patents if no follow-up real application is filed?  I think mentioning that condition, if it is a precondition, would be important.  The second is that the provisional application only provides an effective filing date if it meets the same legal standard that must be met by a real application -- no skimping on substantive quality allowed.

I'll just note that J Watts doesn't appear to be listed on the Patent Professionals web site.  But there are many explanations for that.

I would respectfully submit that "Hewlett-Packard, Texas Instruments, IBM, [and] Halliburton" are not necessarily great clients.  Many large, international corporations are playing a numbers game in their patent strategy.  As a result, you end up doing what I call "commodity work" -- some fixed fee per application in the mid-4-figures no matter what.  And, they have inside counsel pushing for better and better quality.  You end up working for less compensation than the current market rate for paralegals.  It's hard, largely thankless work that doesn't pay particularly well.  I don't know much about Mr. Sonnabend's clients, but there's a good chance I'd prefer them to the mega-clients listed by Mr. Watts.

I prefer working for small start-ups where quality matters.  The work is very challenging but very rewarding.  I have a hard time getting excited about some minor tweak in existing technology that you're likely to see doing commodity work.  In addition, with the small client resting so much importance on the first few pieces of IP, the patent practitioner takes on an importance that you don't see in many other contexts -- and, to some degree, you get paid more like a star.

I don't want to ding Patent Professionals (partly because the main guy -- the only guy listed -- is from my alma mater), but I don't envy their practice.  It's an interesting business model for the IP practice, but I'm happier where I am now.

Now, having said all that, my preference would be for this site to be about discussing the law and client needs (hypothetical, of course) rather than arguing about who has the coolest practice.

Regards.