What is Patent Drafting?

A patent drafting application includes a written detailed description of the invention and set of patent claims to define the scope of the invention. The patent drafting document is evaluated and examined by the patent examiner for granting a patent technology. Patent drafting should be completed and abbreviated. Patent Drafting should include basic details of the invention and explain the process, machine,manufacture, and composition of matter and also give the description of mode of principal. Patent draft or patent application should be written in consultation with a patent expert who is a patent attorney or a lawyer who has a good knowledge of understanding technical aspects of a technology. A technology to be patented may be a process, machine, manufacturing process or composition of matter which is related to improvement of prior art. The patent specification includes background of invention, subject of invention, explanation of patent drawing and summary of invention. The patent draft should also comprehend the valuable uses either to humans or to industry. The method and the process should be told clearly to patent attorney in the invention disclosure form before drafting a patent which is called claim drafting.

Depending on the invention and inventor there may be one or more patent draft covering the technology portfolio. The most important aspect of any patent document are the patent claims. A very broad patent claims may not be granted and a very narrow patent claim will narrow down the scope of granted patent. If the patent claims are considered irrelevant it may lead to rejection.

The art of patent claim drafting is undeniabally difficult art to master. It is however, essential for those in patent space to both appreciate, understand and master. Given the importance of patent claims it is not unreasonable to want to start there, electing to jump right into the deep end. That would be a mistake. That is not how patent attorneys do it, and if you want to succeed that shouldn’t be your approach either.

Before you ever think about writing patent claims there are several very basic questions must be answered first. They are:

  1. What is the invention?
  2. What are the pieces and parts that make up that invention?
  3. How do the pieces and parts relate to one another?
  4. Do you have more than one invention?
  5. Are there multiple versions of each invention?


Inventions can be described as vague or ambiguous manner. But all too frequently inventors will make mistake of only describing their invention very specifically. You obviously want in a hyper specific way the version of your invention that you are selling as well as any versions that you think have commercial potential or might be knocked off. But you cannot merely describe your invention in a specific way. The goal must be to describe your invention in a specific way.

What are the pieces and parts that make up that invention and how do the pieces and parts relate to one another?

In order to define an invention that is new and non-obvious you must include something in the claim that is different and what found in the prior art. Perhaps you are improving the prior art by adding something to an existing invention. Perhaps you have come up with a more eloquent solution that requires fewer pieces and parts, which make the invention cheaper to manufacture and more durable. Whatever the case may be that best defines your innovative solution, the claim need to define something that is different. The goal of doing a search is to find the closest prior art. While I always recommend inventors do their own search to start, at some point a professional patent search should be obtained. Generally speaking for $400 to $600 you can get a high quality patent search by a reputable search company, and they will find a lot more than you will. But do your own search to start. If you can find something that is too close for comfort you might as well save the money.

Do you have more than one invention? Are there multiple versions of each invention?

As you look over your prior art what do is identify the difference between your invention and prior art. Initially, try and find as many differences as you can. Some of the differences will not be of patentable importance. Inventors love to focus on different uses, but if you are trying to protect a device it does not help that someone has described the same or very similar device to be used differently. If you are trying to protect a device you need to focus on the device, not the use. So identify as many structural differences as you can. Hopefully the differences you identify will be advantages. I always encourage my clients to also ask whether the differences they identify and want to build the patent around are things consumers will be willing to pay a premium to obtain.