Author: Menteso Editorial Team

EPO Patent Drawing Rules

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

All patent offices have their patent drawing rules that should be followed stringently while filing the patent applications. We will discuss the EPO Patent Drawing Rules requirements of the European Patent Office.

EPO (European patent Office) has set patent drawing rules for drawings, photographs, diagrams, and flowsheets that you must follow while generating drawings for the patent application. If you do not follow the patent drawing rules, you might get the unnecessary objections from the examiner. These unnecessary objections will increase grant time for your patent. A great patent drawing is one that doesn’t raise any examiner query. And for a set of great patent drawings, you need an expert patent illustrator.

Also Read: Germany Patent Drawings Rule

EPO Patent Drawing rules: Important Points

You must follow EPO Patent Drawing Rules for cutting down office actions, saving costs, time, and efforts. Following patent drawings rules are the source for first-hand rejection of the patent drawings and thus your patent application:

Color Drawing Rules of European Patent Office

Black and White Patent Drawings:

As per the EPO patent drawing rules, the EPO requires black and white drawings. You can use black printing ink such as India ink when you are printing the drawings on paper. You need to make sure that when the drawings are made using any software, the drawings are generated using only black color. It is to be noted that the other colors when printed in black and white can give different shades of grey color.

Black and White Photographs:

Photographs are possible as per the EPO Patent Drawing Rules solely when they are the only available medium for illustration of the invention. The examples of photograph eligible patent illustrations could be chemical structures, cell structures, or beauty products, etc.

It is to be noted that the photographs should be of high quality so that they can print every detail when they are printed in black and white format.

Colored Photographs:

A Color photograph is acceptable only when you satisfy the conditions for the acceptance of black and white photographs. Also, the color photograph should satisfy the condition of color drawings.

Colour Drawings:

You must use color drawings only when you have no other choice. The color drawings’ quality should be very high. The examiner or the patent office should be able to print every detail of the color drawing in black and white format. Please note that the color drawings are prohibited in international applications. They may be allowed only when they are the only medium to express the details of the invention.

If you wish to use color drawings in your application, you must file a petition with the EPO. Your petition must explain the significance of the color drawings. The EPO patent drawing rules allow color drawings only after the grant of the petition.

The inclusions of color drawing petition are:

Petition Filing fee.
A black and white photocopy of the color drawing with similar details and 3 sets of color drawings.
Your drawing description must include the following paragraph: “The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee”.

Drawing Identifications rules of the EPO

The Drawing Identification must include:

Title of the invention.
Name of the Inventor.
Application number/Docket number.

You must place this information on the front page and align it to the center with the top margin.

Size of the Sheet as per EPO Patent Drawing Rules

All the drawing sheets must have same size. You must stick to any of the following dimensions:

21.0 * 29.7 cm, or
21.6 * 27.9 cm

The weight of the paper should be 80-120 g/m² (gsm).

Paper Type for EPO Patent Drawings

Your drawing paper must be flexible, durable, white, non-shiny, and smooth. Do not use sheets with folds and creases. Further, you must only one side of the sheet. You must try to avoid erasure marks, overwriting, and alterations.

Paper Margins rules in EPO Patent Drawings

All sheets of your EPO patent drawings must follow the following margin scale:

The top margin of 2.5 cm.
Left side margin of 2.5 cm.
Right side margin of 1.5 cm.
The bottom margin of 1.0 cm.

Types of Views:

Orthogonal Views

Your drawing should include all orthogonal views of the invention i.e. top view, Bottom view, Side view, Front view, Back view, etc.

Perspective Views

Also, you must include one or more perspective views of the invention. Further, try to keep one view on a sheet. However, you are permitted to include more views on a sheet. We do not recommend more than 2 views on a sheet for better clarity. In addition, try to avoid wasting sheets, keep the position, and maintain a proper gap between the views.

NOTE: Do not use similar sheets for views and claims.

Some other important views are included below. These views become important when you need to give more specific details about your invention.

Exploded Views:

Exploded views show the working, order, or relationship of an assembly of different parts. You must place an exploded view within the brackets. Read Patent Drawing Exploded Views for more information on exploded views.

Sectional Views:

A sectional view is used to show a hidden area or part of an object by cutting/removing some of the parts of that object. The cutting line is termed as cutting plane. Read Patent Drawing Sectional Views for more details.

Use of Scale in Patent Drawings

You must create a drawing with a scale that shows the mechanism of the invention without crowding. Further, you cannot use indications like actual size or scale 1/2 on the drawings.

Drawing Surface Shading requirements:

Drawing Surface Shading indicates the surface conditions or shape of any object. Spaced lines are preferred for shading. They must be thin, few in number and must contrast with the rest of the drawing. Further, you can also use stippling shading, however, that shading is generally recommended for design patent drawings.

In addition, you must assume the Light coming from the upper left corner at an angle of 45° for shading. Pitch black shading is prohibited. However, you may represent bar graphs with them.

Consider Reading: Patent Drawing Symbols for Draftsmen, the topic includes symbols for surface shading.

Drawing References:

Use the English alphabet for references. However, to depict wavelengths, angles, and formulas, etc. you may use other kinds of alphabets.
Keep legible reference characters such as sheet or view numbers. You should avoid using brackets or inverted commas.
Keep the size of Numbers and letters to a minimum of 0.32 cm in height. You must place them at a clear surface and avoid placing them over figures and shades.
Orient the references in the direction of the drawing view.

Symbols/Graphics:

You can consider using Graphical drawing symbols for conventional elements. You must use symbols to illustrate devices that bear a conventional meaning around the world and acceptance in the art. The capital letter of the symbol must have a height of 0.21 cm.

Use of Arrows in Drawings

You are allowed to use the arrows at the end of the lines. These arrows are used to indicate the following:

At the tip of the lead line to indicate the entire section in the direction of the arrow.
Indicating the direction of movement.

Leadlines:

Leadline connects the reference characters and referred details. You must keep the leadlines as small as possible. Lead lines can be straight or curved. It is important to note that the leadlines must not overlap with each other.

Copyright/Mask Work Notice:

If you wish to place a copyright/mask work notice, use it just below the relevant figure. You should keep the size of the letters from 0.32 to 0.64 cm. Further, limit the contents of the notice as per the law.

Furthermore, you must stick to the authorized language to gain a permit for the copyright/mask work notice.

EPO Patent Drawing Rules: Tips

You must take care of some major tips in order to file the application correctly and in accordance with the EPO patent drawing rules. They are:

Submit durable and permanent correction to the Office.
Avoid holes in the drawing sheets.
Number different views and sheets of the drawing with Arabic numerals.
Place authorized security markings on the top of the page, centered at the top margin.

Drawings within Proper Patent Drawing Rules – Patent Drawing Experts

We the Patent Drawing Experts are always there for you with our experienced professionals in the market. We are the Patent Drawings Company that follows Patent Office Rules Religiously. We believe in accurately diligent work and proper customer satisfaction. Our experienced team at the Patent Drawing Experts comprises of experts and professionals patent illustrators.

Our Patent Drawing Services include both Utility Patent Drawings as well as Design Patent Drawings.

As soon as you place an order, our team starts working on it. Our team uses the latest Softwares and delivers the drawings as per your requirements. Moreover, our prices are highly competitive. In addition, we work within a quick turnaround time and with long-lasting results. Our work outputs are in flexible formats. To get to know more about our services, please visit The Patent Drawings Company of Patent Drawing Experts.

Articles

Patent Search Databases: Official Sources and Research Checklist

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

A patent search database indexes published patent applications and granted patents so researchers can find technical disclosures, bibliographic records and related documents. Choose the database according to the research question, countries, dates, languages and document types needed. No single result list should be assumed to provide complete legal or technical coverage.

Official Patent Search Databases

For U.S. publications, start with the USPTO patent search page and Patent Public Search. For worldwide technical research, the EPO provides Espacenet. WIPO’s PATENTSCOPE includes published PCT applications and documents from participating offices.

For Indian records, use the public-search resources linked by IP India. For procedural status or ownership questions, locate the relevant official register or record system as well as the publication database. A technical search interface and a legal-status register serve different purposes.

Free Search Tools and Commercial Platforms

Google Patents provides another way to explore patent documents and related references. Commercial platforms may offer additional analytics, workflow tools or curated data. Compare actual coverage, update information, export options and the features included in a current quote instead of assuming a paid label guarantees completeness.

Patent Database vs. Intellectual Property Database

Intellectual property includes different rights with different records. A patent search database does not replace a trademark register or a design search system. Define whether the task concerns an invention, brand, registered design or another right before selecting the source.

Build a Search Plan

Start with the known publication number, applicant, inventor or technical features. Prepare synonyms and relevant classifications, test a small query set and inspect the results. Follow each database’s own syntax and date-field definitions; an identical-looking query can behave differently across platforms.

Record the source, query, filters, search date and exact publication reference. Save relevant passages or figures with inclusion reasons. When reviewing a family, distinguish the particular publication relied on from its related documents.

Verify Coverage and Conclusions

Check missing documents, language limits and whether non-patent literature is relevant. Verify legally significant status with the competent official source. A search supports assessment; it does not by itself establish patentability, validity or freedom to operate.

Read our Espacenet guide and Google Patents workflow. Contact Menteso to discuss research coverage, deliverables and review responsibilities.

Articles

How patent drawings are reviewed at USPTO?

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

Patent drawing review concerns whether the figures can be read, reproduced and understood in the context of the application. A drawing set needs both a technical-content review and a check against the applicable filing standards. This guide explains common issues and how to organise a correction workflow.

Initial Drawing Review at the USPTO

MPEP section 507 describes initial drawing review by the Office of Patent Application Processing. For the applications covered by that review, concerns include reproducibility, legible lines and characters, lead lines, excessive text, margins, sheet size and figure labels. Passing an initial presentation check is not a guarantee of patentability or grant.

Check the Figures Before Submission

Review each drawing at the intended output size. Check that text remains legible, labels point clearly to the intended feature and the views describe the same revision. Compare the figure references with the written description. Keep unresolved technical questions separate from formatting questions so each reaches the right reviewer.

Use the Application-Specific Standards

Different application types can have different requirements. Consult the USPTO application guidance and the rules for the intended filing. Do not copy a checklist for another patent office or assume that a manufacturing drawing is already suitable for a patent application.

If You Receive a Drawing Objection

Read the actual notice with the supervising practitioner. Identify the requested correction, response deadline and submission instructions. Record who will prepare, review and submit the replacement material. A general article cannot replace the directions applicable to a particular notice.

Use a change log linking each requested correction to the revised sheet and reviewer approval. Compare the replacement set against the original technical source, and have the practitioner assess any disclosure questions before submission. Save the filed set and the submission evidence with the matter.

Agree a Clear Drawing Brief

Before commissioning illustrations, specify the application type, patent office, source formats and intended delivery date. Name the technical reviewer and the person responsible for filing approval. A clear brief reduces avoidable revisions and makes exceptions easier to escalate.

Discuss Patent Drawing Support

Explore Menteso patent drawing services and our drawing symbols guide. Contact the team to discuss scope, source material, review and confidentiality arrangements.

Article News archive

Samsung v. Apple – Supreme Court Limits Damages in Design Patent Cases

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

In a closely watched case involving the cell phone “war” between Apple and Samsung, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed a damages award against Samsung of nearly $400 million and moved the law regarding damages for infringement of design patents into a new area of uncertainty.1

The case involved a successful claim by Apple that Samsung infringed three Apple design patents directed to various ornamental features of a cell phone.2 In a design patent infringement action, besides the traditional measure of patent damages “adequate to compensate for the infringement” available to all patent holders under 35 U.S.C. § 284, there is an “additional remedy for infringement of a design patent” available under 35 U.S.C. § 289 which allows recovery of infringers “total profit.” Specifically, the statute provides that if an infringer “(1) applies the patented design, or any colorable imitation thereof to any article of manufacture for the purpose of sale, or (2) sells or exposes for sale any article of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation has been applied shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit… .”3 It was under this statute that Apple secured its damages award in a jury trial that was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. The issue presented to the Supreme Court was whether the phrase “article of manufacture” used in Section 289 necessarily referred to the product being sold or could include components of the thing sold.

Apple argued that neither the district court’s jury instructions nor the Federal Circuit’s opinion required that “the relevant article of manufacture must always be the entire product as sold,” but rather the question as to the relevant “article of manufacture” on “which the infringer’s ‘total profit’ should be awarded is, when disputed, a factual question for the jury.” This very factual issue the jury determined against Samsung—at least according to Apple.4 Samsung, predictably enough, disagreed, arguing that the Federal Circuit’s opinion created a categorical rule that the design-patent holder prevailing in an infringement case would always be awarded “the infringer’s total profit on the entire product as sold—no matter how partial the patent or how limited the contribution of the patented feature to the product’s value or sales.”5 Samsung also argued that an award of infringer’s profits should be limited to the profit “attributable to the ‘article of manufacture’ to which an infringing design is ‘applied’” and ‘“made from the infringement’” (i.e. the patent owner would have the burden to prove profits were “attributable to infringement of the patented design.”).6

The United States appeared as amicus curiae supporting neither party. It rejected Samsung’s apportionment limitation, arguing that Section 289 “unambiguously permits a patent holder to recover the infringer’s entire profits from the “article of manufacture” to which the design was applied, regardless of the extent to which those profits are attributable to the infringing design.” However, it also maintained that the ‘“article of manufacture’ will not always be the finished product that is sold in commerce. Rather, the relevant article will sometimes be a component of the ultimate item of sale. In such cases, the patentee is entitled only to the infringer’s total profit for that component, not its total profit for the finished item.” In this, it disagreed with the Federal Circuit’s approach, which is characterized, contrary to Apple’s position, as invariably making the “article of manufacture” the “entire product as sold.” This the United States maintained “would result in grossly excessive and essentially arbitrary awards.” Instead, the United States offered that the ‘“article of manufacture’ inquiry entails a case-specific examination of the relationship among the design, any relevant components, and the product as a whole” and it suggested several detailed considerations that should be weighed in the inquiry.

Source: http://www.natlawreview.com

Tags Design Patent, design patent applications, Design Patent Drawings

Articles Blog

35 U.S.C. 113 DRAWINGS

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

The applicant shall furnish a drawing where necessary for the understanding of the subject matter sought to be patented. When the nature of such subject matter admits of illustration by a drawing and the applicant has not furnished such a drawing, the Director may require its submission within a time period of not less than two months from the sending of a notice thereof. Drawings submitted after the filing date of the application may not be used (i) to overcome any insufficiency of the specification due to lack of an enabling disclosure or otherwise inadequate disclosure therein, or (ii) to supplement the original disclosure thereof for the purpose of interpretation of the scope of any claim.

Source: USPTO

Patent Drawings General

Sectional View

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

In Sectional Views, the interior structures of an object are shown by slicing a part of an object. The sectional view can also be orthogonal or perspective. There can be:

a front perspective sectional view

a front sectional view

a side sectional view etc.

The image shows a sectional view of a servo motor.

Articles Patent Drawings General

Exploded View

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

Exploded enclosure drawing showing the lid, gasket and base separated in assembly order. — A simplified enclosure separated into lid, gasket and base to explain the order of assembly. Illustrative example only.

An exploded view is a drawing that shows an assembly’s parts separated from their fitted positions so the reader can understand how they relate or fit together. It may use a perspective or an orthographic projection. The separation explains the arrangement; it does not mean the parts are shown at their normal working distances.

What does an exploded view help explain?

A complete product can hide the parts that hold it together. An exploded drawing makes those relationships easier to inspect: a cover above a housing, a seal between surfaces, or fasteners beside their fixing points. Choose the separation direction around the information the figure needs to communicate.

For example, a generic enclosure might contain a lid, a gasket and a base. Showing those components apart can clarify their order. This is an illustrative drawing brief, not a client project or a statement about a particular invention. The inventor or technical reviewer should confirm every component and connection.

Exploded, assembled and sectional views answer different questions

An assembled view shows the product together. An exploded view shows separate components and their relationship. A sectional view can reveal internal structure by representing a cut through the object. A useful figure set may combine these methods instead of asking one figure to explain every feature.

An exploded perspective view can help a reader recognise shape and orientation. An orthographic exploded view can emphasise alignment in a particular direction. There is no universal requirement to view an assembly diagonally from above. Select a direction that makes the relevant relationship clear and remains consistent with the other figures.

Using an exploded view in a U.S. patent drawing set

37 CFR 1.84(h)(1) permits exploded views and describes brackets around separated parts. It also addresses placement when another figure shares the sheet. Check the current rule when planning the sheet; an attractive assembly illustration is not automatically a filing-ready drawing.

The USPTO’s MPEP 608.02 explains drawing practice and reproduces the drawing standards. Keep reference characters consistent across related views, and review whether the written description explains the components that the figure identifies. These checks should be coordinated with the patent professional responsible for the application.

A practical brief for an illustrator

Provide the current assembly information: source CAD or sketches, the parts that should appear, an assembled reference, and the relationship that needs explaining. Identify the approved design revision and flag any missing details. If a connection is uncertain, ask for clarification rather than inventing a fastener, recess or attachment.

Agree which components can be moved apart in the illustration and which orientation must stay fixed. Ask for a preliminary arrangement before detailed line work. Check that the exploded arrangement can be mentally put back together and that repeated parts are depicted consistently. Document any intentional omissions for the responsible reviewer.

Review the figure with the rest of the application

Compare the exploded figure with the assembled and detail views. Look for a part that changes shape, an unexplained gap, a repeated label used for different components, or a component that disappears from the figure set. A clear separation should reveal relationships without creating ambiguity about the actual construction.

For a design application, the disclosure question concerns the claimed appearance. MPEP 1503.02 discusses the views needed to disclose that appearance. Do not assume an exploded assembly view replaces the views required for a particular design. Ask the responsible practitioner to review the proposed figure list and any broken-line treatment.

Discuss the drawing you need

Explore Menteso’s patent drawing service to discuss an exploded view alongside the rest of your figure set. Start with a non-confidential description, intended patent office, source formats and review responsibilities, then agree scope and confidentiality arrangements before sharing unpublished technical material.

Patent Drawings General

Isometric Views

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

In isometric view, three-dimensional objects are visually represented in two dimensions in such a way that the three coordinate axes appear equally foreshortened and the angle between any two of them is 120 degrees.

It is a particular type of perspective view wherein the view is isometric (iso=equal; metric=measurement).

Isometric views of objects are made to show as much detail as possible, typically with technical drawings. In the normal perspective, all lines converge in a vanishing point, and detail at the farthest ends can be difficult to see.

Articles Blog

Germany Patent Drawing Rules

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

Germany Patent Drawing Rules – Standards for the filing of drawings

The Germany Patent Drawing Rules shall be on sheets with the following minimum margins:
top 2.5 cm
left side 2.5 cm
right side 1.5 cm
bottom 1.0 cmThe area used for drawings may not exceed 26.2 cm x 17 cm; the area used for the drawing of the abstract may be 8.1 cm x 9.4 cm when presented in an upright position, or 17.4 cm x 4.5 cm when presented sideways <Germany Patent Drawing Rules>
Drawings shall be executed with sufficient contrast in durable, black, sufficiently dense and dark, uniformly thick and clearly delineated lines and strokes without colorings. <Germany Patent Drawing Rules>
For illustrating the invention, in addition to views and sectional views, perspectives and exploded views may be used. Cross-sections shall be indicated by hatching which should not impede the clear reading of the reference signs and leading lines. <Germany Patent Drawing Rules>
The scale of the drawings and the distinctness of their graphical execution shall be such that all details can be distinguished without difficulty, after electronic data capture (scanning), in a linear reduction in size to two-thirds. If, as an exception, the scale is given on a drawing, it shall be represented graphically.
The lines in the drawings shall be drawn with the aid of drafting instruments rather than freehand. The numbers and letters used in the drawings shall not be less than 0.32 cm of height. For the lettering of drawings, the Latin and, where customary, the Greek alphabets shall be used. <Germany Patent Drawing Rules>
The same sheet of drawings may contain several figures. The different figures shall be arranged without wasting space while remaining clearly separated from one another, preferably in an upright position, and shall be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. Drawings concerning the state of the art are admissible if the understanding of the invention is thereby facilitated; however, they shall be clearly marked as “Stand der Technik” (state of the art). Where figures on two or more sheets form in effect a single complete figure, the figures on the several sheets shall be so arranged that the complete figure can be assembled without concealing any part of the partial figures. All elements of a figure shall be on the same scale, except where the use of different scales is indispensable for the clarity of the figure.
Reference signs not mentioned in the description and claims shall not appear in the drawings, and vice versa. The same shall apply mutatis mutandis to the abstract and its drawing.
The drawings shall not contain text matter, except, when absolutely indispensable, a single word or words such as “water”, “steam”, “open”, “closed”, “section on AB”, and, in the case of electric circuits and block schematic or flow sheet diagrams, a few short catchwords indispensable for understanding. Germany Patent Drawing Rules.

Tags Patent Drawing Rules, patent drawings

Patent Drawings General

Orthogonal Drawing Views

Post author By Menteso Editorial Team
Post date March 10, 2022

In Orthogonal or engineering view, the viewer’s eyes are centered on one side of the object. In other words, the viewer’s line of sight is orthogonal (perpendicular) to aside. Look at the picture it has all possible orthogonal views of the Perspective View of a drawing shown on the top right corner of the picture. All the views are listed as under:

‘Front View’ or ‘Front Side View’ or ‘Front Elevational View’. The viewpoint is centered over the front side.
‘Rear View’ or ‘Rear Side View’ or ‘Rear Elevational View’. The viewpoint is centered over the rear side.
‘Right Side View’ or ‘Right Elevational View’. The viewpoint is centered over the right side.
‘Left Side View’ or ‘Left Elevational View’. The viewpoint is centered over the left side.
‘Top View’ or ‘Top Side View’ or ‘Plan View’. The viewpoint is centered over the top side.
‘Bottom View’ or “Bottom Side View’. The viewpoint is centered over the bottom side.

Orthogonal Views do not convey the depth and thus these views are relatively difficult to understand. This is the reason that the same of many surfaces appear ambiguous. Notwithstanding the failure to meet the clarity standards orthogonal views are commonly used in patent drawings. The reason behind this usage is that these views are comparatively simple to make. If one orthogonal view is considered alone, without the help of the other views, the actual shape of the object can not be determined. An object which appears to be a rectangle in an orthogonal view may have various possible actual shapes. Therefore, if the shape of the object is not conveyed clearly in an orthogonal view, all other possible orthogonal views should be used. If still the shape is not conveyed using all the possible orthogonal views then one or more perspective views should be used.