Q: Suma has a patent for fish feed formulation and now she realizes the addition of 10% by weight of coconut oil into the

A: Suma can protect her improvement in fish feed formulation by filing a patent application. Since the addition of coconut oil is a novel improvement over the existing formulation, it may meet the criteria for patentability, particularly if it provides a new and non-obvious benefit, like extended disintegration time.

In preparing her application, she should clearly document how her improvement differs from what is already known in the field. This includes detailing the specific effects of adding coconut oil and how this contributes to the efficacy of the fish pellets.

It's advisable for her to conduct a thorough patent search. This step is crucial to ensure her improvement isn't already covered under existing patents. It also helps in understanding the scope of current technology in her field, which could aid in drafting a robust and comprehensive patent application.

Working with a patent attorney would be beneficial in this process. An attorney can guide her through the complexities of patent law, help in drafting the application to ensure it meets all legal requirements, and assist in navigating the patent office procedures.

Once the patent application is filed, she should be prepared for a potentially lengthy review process. The patent office will examine her application for compliance with legal standards, including novelty and non-obviousness. Her attorney can assist in responding to any queries or objections raised by the patent office during this process.

If her application is successful and the patent is granted, it will give her exclusive rights to use and license her formulation, thereby providing a competitive edge in the market.

A: This is a type of a very common question. It is tough to get a patent on this improvement if Suma is just adding a known ingredent to a known composition and it acts in a known manner. It will certainly be rejected by the Examiner as obvious under KSR rationale (A).

Here is how I typically handle these types of applications

Firstly, check if there ar still pending patent applications based on the first patent. If so, then file a CIP off that application.

Secondly, Suma needs to get lots of laboratory data. She needs to come up some analytical results that can be used to write up a 132 declaration showing unexpected results to traverse the inevitable obviouness rejection.

Thirdly, Suma may need to keep improving her formulations, by, for example, selecting additional ingredients, that would show additional unexpected improvements.

Fourthly, Suma may simply not be able to get a second patent, and will have to rely on the first one.

Sorry, I wish that I had a better answer, but if she wants to get a second patent on her fishfood and oil, it won't be easy.