Skip over navigation

11/04/98 15:36 V309 765 5803 DEERE&CO PATENT

Forest Richard L

From: Forest L. Richard

Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 1998 1:18 PM

To: ''

Subject., Patent drawing standardization


My name is Rick Forest and I am a patent draftsman with over 30 years experience. Regarding the standardization of PCT and USPTO drawing requirements, I have the following comments, Consideration should, be given that the standards of the USPTO should not be lowered to that of the PCT. Proper shading of the structure depicted in the patent drawing allows for and accurate interpretation of the structure shown. Is it a hole we're viewing or a sphere? Is it a beam or a slot? Etc, Etc. The PCT does not require such shading of objects, nor is cross-hatching in sectional views a common practice. If the structure in a patent drawing is to be accurately understood, particularly during patent litigation, the USPTO drawing standards lend themselves to the most comprehensive understanding possible. For years, I have reviewed both the Official Gazette and the PCT Gazette for potential competitive patents. I can assure the reader that I have witnessed many drawings published in the PCT Gazette as nothing more than sketches, Imagine trying to understand a cross-sectional view of a planetary transmission without the cross-hatching. Does this mean that the required minimum 1/8 inch for characters and reference numbers will be ignored? This in itself will undoubtedly cause clarity problems for the Official Gazette. Before any decision is final, I urge the reader and any other person(s) interested, to review the PCT Gazette and ask themselves, 'is this an acceptable drawing standard that will lend itself and the intellectual property community to a more thorough understanding of the claimed elements"? Thank you for your input request.

Richard Forest 309 765 4400

Patent dept.

Deere & co

Moline, IL 61255




  1. International Oatent Classification 6 :

F03G 7/00


(11)International Publication Number: WO 95/06816

(43) Int.Publication Date 9 March 1995 (09,03.95)


(21) Int. Application Number: PCT/GB94/01804

(22) Int. Filing Date: 18 August 1994 (18,08.94)

(30) Priority Data:

9317157.7 18 August 1993 OB (18.08.93)

(71)(72) Applicant and Inventor: FOSS. Rupert, Nigel. Malzard {GB/GB}; Le Friquet, Rue du Friquet, Caste1, Guernsey GY5 IT(GB).


(81) Designated States: AM, AT, AU, BB, BG, BR,

BY. CA, CH, CN, CZ, DF, DK, ES. Fl, GB. GE, HU. JP, KE, KOP KP, KR, KZ, LK, LT. LU. LV, MD, MG, MN, MW, NL, NO, NZ, PL, PT, RO, RU, SD, SE, Si, SK, TJ. IT, UA, US, UZ VN,



Wiith international search report,

-Before the expiration of the time limit for amending the claims and to be republished in the event of the receipt of amendments.




(S7) Abstract

My design is a family of machines designed to do the most good, Some fly otherwise move by directing cold fluids/air over all their surfaces so that they effectively can lift huge weights, including their own armour. Heat seeking ordnance will deviate away to hotter background. Amour is (from outside inwards), maximum absorption rubber, maximum resilience rubber, maximum toughness and springiness steel, maximum resilience rubber. Maximum thickness aluminum. Thus indetectable it night. Any incoming Ordnance will deflect outwards because of luming couple caused by Maximum resistance near surface and lower resistance inside. Essentially I maximize pressure and temperature without pollution, the most effective is circular motion to centrifuge the combustion process but it also works well on reciprocating engines. I refrigerate the exhaust using the heat and low pressure to efficiently separate pure water from salt water; thus I burn the salt in air/dry steam - eternal power.




United States Patent and Trademark Office
This page is owned by Office of Patent Legal Administration.
Last Modified: 7/4/2009 4:48:32 PM