Provisional Applications – The Great Misconception
Known by various names, Provisional, US Provisional and even Provisional Patent, there is a great misunderstanding of what they are. First, the correct name is Provisional Application.
What they are is an accommodation so the USA could join the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. By way of background, for many decades the concept of priority has existed by International treaty. This allowed applicants to file in foreign countries and to get the benefit of the filing date in their home country, provided the foreign filings were done within one year of the original filing date (known as priority date). Without this procedure, in many instances applicants could be barred from foreign patents as their own original application would block the foreign patents. Priority is the bedrock foundation of the entire International system for obtaining a patent in multiple countries. In the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, they went one step further. It established the concept of a “domestic priority system.” Thus applicants could claim “priority” not only on applications filed in foreign countries, but now also on applications filed in the same country. It was viewed as placing domestic applicants on equal footing with foreign applicants with respect to the patent term. By means of this procedure, it is supposed to enable US applicants to quickly and inexpensively file provisional applications. Under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 119(e), applicants are entitled to claim the benefit of priority in a given application in the United States, based on the provisional application. The domestic priority period will not count in the measurement of the 20-year patent term.
In my view, however, Provisional Applications are not always less expensive and generally cost an applicant more in the long run. Further, because many people file them quickly, they do so haphazardly and obtain no benefit from them.
Inventors and applicants must understand that Provisional applications are not examined by the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). By law they become abandoned one year from the day of filing. It is impossible for a patent to issue from a Provisional application. To get a patent, a second application (the regular utility application) is required.
Many people prepare Provisional applications in a perfunctory manner and just throw something together with little thought. This defeats the very purpose. The law is very clear that a subsequently filed utility application may claim the benefit of the Provisional application only with respect to common disclosed subject matter. Since many Provisional applications do not have a complete disclosure, it many instances the utility application cannot fully claim the benefit.
As stated by the PTO the “written description and any drawing(s) of the provisional application must adequately support the subject matter claimed in the later-filed non-provisional application in order for the later-filed non-provisional application to benefit from the provisional application filing date.” What this means is that the regular utility application cannot claim the benefit of the filing date of the Provisional application if the relevant subject matter was not disclosed in the Provisional application. By way of example, I have one case now where I have been asked to write an utility application based on a Provisional application. The problem is that only the basic concept was disclosed in the Provisional application. There was no disclosure of “the manner and process of making and using the invention, in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which the invention pertains to make and use the invention and set forth the best mode contemplated for carrying out the invention.” While this is being remedied in the utility application, I have my doubts as to whether there will be any benefit gained from the Provisional application, as the important subject matter was not disclosed. This is not an uncommon occurrence. So many times I see Provisional applications with minimal disclosures. This accomplishes nothing. Yes, you may save money in filing the Provisional application, but the entire cost of the Provisional application is many times wasted, because it was done superficially and the utility application cannot claim the benefit, because the critical subject matter was not disclosed in the Provisional application. Further, even when prepared properly, it always costs more money for a patent attorney to do two applications (a Provisional application followed 10 or 11 months later by an utility application) than it does to file one properly prepared utility application. For it to be beneficial, the Provisional application needs to be nearly as detailed as an utility application, except you do not need claims. So, when the application is being drafted and the patent attorney’s mind is on it, why not let him send the necessary extra time to finish the case and write claims? This would be much more efficient I hear people say that they file the Provisional application, because the invention is not finished and will have improvements. This may sound logical, but when you think about and you know the system, it is not a correct way of thinking. If you select any device at random, you will see many dozens of patents at all different stages of the development. The correct approach is to file a patent for the first key development stage of an operational device. Then, when you get to the next development stage, you file your next patent, which may be a Continuation-In-Part (CIP) of the earlier application. When you say you are filing a Provisional application because the invention is not finished and you will later file an utility application for the improved version, think about what you are saying. You are skipping patent protection for the initial stage! This means if a competitor uses the original device, but not the improvement, he does not infringe! Probably that is not what you intend. Another problem is due to PTO backlog. Despite its best efforts, in some technologies, it can take 2 or 3 or 4 or more years for a first action. Though you may claim the benefit of a Provisional application, you lose a year in prosecution by using a Provisional application. When you claim priority on a Provisional application, it is for substantive purposes only, not for procedural aspects. By way of example, if you filed a Provisional application on 10 April 2008 and a regular utility application on 9 April 2009 and claimed priority, the utility application’s place in the queue for examination is determined by the actual filing date of 9 April 2009, even though for patentability and novelty purposes it is treated as though filed on 10 April 2008. You lost a year. Thus, by using a Provisional application, instead of initially filing an utility application, you always delay issuance of a patent by a year. If it is important to get a patent, this may not be a good idea. Remember, infringers cannot be sued until a patent issues. If you build in a one year delay, then you also delay the time you can sue infringers. I am not saying that Provisional applications never have a useful purpose, sometimes they may be of important usefulness. You need to work with an experienced patent attorney to make a determination for your particular situation. On the other hand, all too often, they are misused and create unnecessary extra work and expense and needlessly delay issuance of a US patent.