US Patent Office Has Granted Patents for Perpetuum Mobile

[shruggedatlas]

What bothers me about the patent is that it is so broad it actually covers some of the way an SEG works.

I think you and some others have raised valid criticisms of the current U.S. patent system.  However, having experience in the matter, in practice you would find that if you invented a working device and someone else has invented a nonworking device and patented it first, you would not have much trouble getting your patent approved.  You see, the thing that makes your device actually work would have to be different from the non-working model, so you could differentiate your invention based on that.

The way you lay your claims out is why this works out this way.  Let me give an example.  Suppose someone had patented a device involving a magnet coil and pendulum inside.  (Magnet coil on its own not being sufficient for the device to purportedly work.)  The claim would be

1.  Coiled magnet containing a pendulum.

The claims would NOT be separate:

1.  Containing a magnet coil
2.  Containing a pendulum inside the magent coil.

So you see, if you come in and invent a PPM device that has a hammer inside a coiled magnet, you would simply claim the hammer inside the coiled magnet.  Just because someone else used a coiled magnet does not prevent you from getting your idea patented.

What you do typically see is alot of "dependent" claims attached to "independent" claims, and this can lead to confusion, but always remember that if you can differentiate your independent claim, the claims that depend on it will not apply to you.  And with independent claims, each combination of dependent and independent claim is its own separate invention.  For example:

Claim 1:  Coiled magnet with pendulum inside.      (This is the independent claim.)
Claim 2.  Claim 1 above, in addition to which the entire apparatus is placed inside a sealed chamber filled with helium.

So based on above, if you invented a coiled magnet with a hammer inside, and then you decided to place the entire device inside a helium-filled chamber, you would not be barred from doing so, because the dependent claim must be considered in conjunction with the independent claim, and since your independent claim differs, the dependent claim does not apply to you.

Now all this is a gross oversimplification, but I hope you get the idea of how claims work.  You cannot just claim each component individually and prevent others from using your components.  You claim the entire device.

[Pirate88179]

Shrugged:

In my example in an earlier post, the ceramic springs were part of an assembly.  The patent covered the assembly and all of the components such that we received a cease and desist order to stop manufacturing and selling our springs.  We beat it because they still could not make even one, and we provided proof that we made the ones they submitted to get the patent and, we had been making and selling them for 8 years prior to their application.

My point is, you said that they would not issue a patent on the parts of a device, just a device.  But, in this case they (Patent Office) did exactly that.  And our Patent attorney said that ALL people seeking patents for ANY technological device had to submit three working examples or the patent application would not even be considered.  I read what Hans said about not requiring that but was our attorney that misinformed?  He charged us over $10,000 to initiate the application process and that was back in the early 80's.  I would have hoped he knew what he was talking about, but, I work with attorneys all the time now and, if I ask three of them a question, I get three different answers. I'm just curious.  Thanks.

Bill

[shruggedatlas]

Shrugged:

In my example in an earlier post, the ceramic springs were part of an assembly.  The patent covered the assembly and all of the components such that we received a cease and desist order to stop manufacturing and selling our springs.  We beat it because they still could not make even one, and we provided proof that we made the ones they submitted to get the patent and, we had been making and selling them for 8 years prior to their application.

My point is, you said that they would not issue a patent on the parts of a device, just a device.  But, in this case they (Patent Office) did exactly that.  And our Patent attorney said that ALL people seeking patents for ANY technological device had to submit three working examples or the patent application would not even be considered.  I read what Hans said about not requiring that but was our attorney that misinformed?  He charged us over $10,000 to initiate the application process and that was back in the early 80's.  I would have hoped he knew what he was talking about, but, I work with attorneys all the time now and, if I ask three of them a question, I get three different answers. I'm just curious.  Thanks.

Bill

I am not technically a patent attorney, and I have done no patent litigation and have not submitted any patents.  However, I have worked with other attorneys on analyzing specific patents for various purposes, and I have done infringement and prior art analyses, but there are many things I do not know.  Still, I have not heard of having to have a working prototype in order to get a patent.  Maybe this applies to perpetual motion devices only.

[Prophmaji]

physical models or outside (patent office choice of people 'versed in the art') replication can be and sometimes is requested, by the patent office on what they may designate, after investigation... to be 'dubious claims'.

So, it specifically depends on if the USPTO thinks you are full of shit or not.

And I don't have to be psychic, Hans, to note that Omni seems to have taken a real shining to you. I'm not really seeing you be an asshole, here. I think Omni needs to go in for at least a small amount of therapy. First he must be willing to understand that he has obvious issues.

[ken_nyus]

I can't imagine that any working models of this patent were produced:

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5052638

An electromagnetic ramjet propulsion system is provided for accelerating high mass payloads through the upper atomsphere at orbital velocities. The propulsion system comprises a plurality of coplaner self-supporting superconducting dipole coils several hundred meters in diameter that is initially accelerated to high altitude and supersonic speed by magnetic repulsive forces generated by a plurality of superconducting field coils several kilometers in diameter embeded beneath the earth's surface. The ramjet is accelerated to orbital velocities by a multigigawatt microwave beam that is transmitted from the earth's surface. A reflecting grid of conducting wires is mounted inside the inner dipole which shock ionizes the low dentisy atmospheric gas passing through it. The frequency of the microwave beam is adjusted to produce electron cyclotron resonance with the free electrons passing through the magnetic field of the dipoles thereby accelerating them away from the dipoles by magnetic...