A valuable patent covers a product or method without key weaknesses such as trivial design-around options or validity issues. To obtain the most valuable patent possible, the inventor and the patent agent should work as a team. Some factors enabling a good patent include inventor inputs, initial searching and claim drafting, use of a broad description, use of examples, inclusion of key technical subtleties, and careful use of language throughout.

Inventor inputs include the initial disclosure and communication. The more complete the initial disclosure, the easier it is for the patent agent to get started. Ideally this is followed by a discussion between the agent and inventor to clarify issues or questions around the disclosure. An agent with a strong technical background can better understand subtle aspects of the invention that will later help in drafting potent claims with a well-crafted specification. As work further progresses, timely communication between inventor and agent will maximize the value of the resultant patent application.

The patent application is defined by the initial searching and claim drafting. After obtaining an understanding of the broadest inventive concept, the agent should perform a search of the prior art. The inventor can be a big help by pointing out competitors and prior work of which she is familiar. Based upon the prior art, the agent will craft the broadest claims. Before drafting all the claims, the attorney at this point may assemble a set of proposed drawings, write an outline, and define terms for claims and description. For best results, all of these should be reviewed by agent and inventor before proceeding. This is very important since the claims define the value of the patent.

Only when claims are defined should the agent write the written description. It is preferable to start with a broad description whose language and scope of discussion is commensurate with the broadest claim. This defines the strategic value of the patent. Do you see why it is so important to define the scope of the broadest concept first? Oftentimes the figures used in the broad description are block diagrams and/or "cartoon" drawings containing few specific embodiment elements outside those in the broadest claims.

Following the broad description, examples of the invention are described. Having more examples is a good thing, as that tends to broaden the meaning of the independent claims. At the same time, examples give the agent something to fall back on if the broadest claims are not allowed. The examples should include the best mode of the claimed invention. In addition, possible "design-around" options should be included. 

Within the broad discussion and/or the examples, key technical subtleties should be included when possible. What do I mean by that? These are key enabling aspects of the invention that are sometimes very specific but at the same time are essentially critical to the results of the invention. Including these in at least some dependent claims increases the chances that very valuable claims will be allowed.

Proper use of language in a patent includes consistency, broadening definitions, and mindful use of limiting terms. Consistency means using terms in the same way throughout the written description and claims. Note that in defining and using terms a patent author can be his own lexicographer but should avoid defining terms that contradict their normal use. Broadening the definition of terms in the detailed description can increase the scope and value of the claims. This subtle aspect of patent drafting is sometimes overlooked. Be very careful about limiting phrases or terms like "it is critical", "only", "consisting of", and the like in either claims or the written description. Using phrases like "by way of illustrative example" rather than "the invention is shown in" is generally preferred.