What are effective strategies for drafting a patent application for a disruptive innovation?

Clearly articulate the problem that the disruptive innovation solves and how it differs from conventional solutions. This not only helps in demonstrating the inventive step but also provides a strong foundation for arguing non-obviousness during prosecution.

It is also important that you look at your solution in a broad way. Try to identify aspects of your technology that could be changed or omitted obtaining the same effect, so that you could anticipate to potential competitors.

The goal of the patent search is to define whether you have good probabilities of obtaining a patent. For this, the invention must be novel and involve an inventive step. EVERYTHING that has been published before, regardless the language, constitutes the prior art. It is not important in this stage whether you could infringe other patents, because if you obtain a patent for your technology, that could give you a good stand for future license or transfer negotiations.

Perform an extensive prior art search to understand the landscape around the innovation. Identify existing technologies, similar solutions, and gaps in the prior art. This knowledge helps draft claims that avoid prior art while capturing the novelty of the invention.

The claims are important for the patent from licensing and enforcement purposes. Therefore, write multiple independent claims with different scope and claim sets covering different embodiments and variations. As the invention relates to disruptive technology, strategize if multiple applications with different claims can be filed depending upon the jurisdiction.

Start with broad, independent claims that capture the essence of the disruptive innovation. Use language that is as general as possible without compromising clarity. Ensure that the claims cover various possible implementations, variations, and use cases of the invention. Consider potential future developments and applications of the technology. Draft claims and descriptions that anticipate changes in the field or related industries. This forward-looking approach can make the patent more robust against design-around attempts and later continuations. Utilize functional language in claims to cover a range of implementations without being overly limiting. Avoid excessive reliance on means-plus-function claiming, as it limits the claim scope

Describe multiple embodiments and variations of the invention in the specification. Disruptive technologies often have multiple potential applications and forms, so covering different implementations can strengthen the patent and provide flexibility during prosecution. Ensure the description provides sufficient detail to enable a person skilled in the art to replicate the invention. For disruptive innovations, this may involve new technologies or methodologies that require thorough explanation. Include examples, diagrams, and flowcharts to illustrate the innovation’s functionality and different embodiments. This adds clarity to complex concepts and strengthens the application’s overall support for the claims.

Some territories are very strict regarding the language of the specification to consider the claims to be supported. Therefore, use a uniform and non-ambiguous terminology along the specification. It is important that, even if you use only concepts broadly known in the technical field, you define every feature that might be ambiguous.

Even though it is more costly, it is highly advisable to consult a patent agent or patent attorney from the initial stages. They have the technical and legal expertise to help you define your invention, perform a prior art search, draft your patent application and assist you during the prosecution. In the long term, it is better to spend some money at the initial stages than having a useless patent.

When drafting the application, be mindful of the requirements of jurisdictions where protection may be sought, such as Europe or Asia. Adapt the language and structure of the application to align with the stricter disclosure and clarity requirements of these regions. Clearly emphasize the technical advantages and improvements provided by the disruptive innovation. This aids in arguing inventive step during prosecution, particularly in jurisdictions with strict examination standards for non-obviousness.