Blog

Welcome to another installment of the Practical Patents series, where we delve into the art and science of patent drafting. Today, we’re exploring a provocative statement by Neil Kardos, an experienced patent attorney and advocate for strategic patenting: “If you’re not drafting claims, then figures, then the specification in that order, you’re doing it wrong.”

At first glance, this assertion seems to challenge conventional wisdom. Traditionally, many practitioners draft the figures and specifications first, leaving the claims for last. However, Neil’s approach, honed through experimentation and practice, suggests a radical departure from this norm.

Traditionally, the process begins with drafting detailed figures and a comprehensive specification. The rationale? It’s believed that having a clear visual and descriptive foundation paves the way for more precise claims. However, Neil’s experience tells a different story.

Neil discovered that this traditional method often necessitated significant rework. Terminology used in the specification might not align with the nuanced language of claim drafting. Questions arise: should it be “one or more” or “at least one”? “Multiple” or “a plurality”? Furthermore, naming conventions in the specification might not resonate with the intricate requirements of claim language, leading to a laborious cycle of revision and alignment between the claims, figures, and specification.

Advantages of a Claims-First Approach

1. Clarity in Novelty and Non-Obviousness: Drafting claims first forces a focus on the invention’s novel aspects. It lays bare the innovative heart of the patent, guiding the subsequent detailing in figures and specifications.
2. Efficiency in Drafting: By starting with claims, Neil found that subsequent steps became more streamlined. The figures and specification could be tailored to support the claims, reducing the need for iterative revisions.
3. Strategic Focus: This approach ensures that the specification and figures emphasize the invention’s most crucial aspects, enhancing the patent’s overall strength.

Neil’s method turns traditional patent drafting on its head, emphasizing a strategic, claims-first approach. While it may not be a one-size-fits-all solution, it certainly provides food for thought for anyone involved in the patenting process.

Don’t forget to come back for more tips in the next installment of the Practical Patents Series. Until next time, happy patenting!