rus
What to do if the technology is developed, brings results, but is not yet recognized by the scientific community? This article discusses some approaches to the protection of such new technologies.
Теги: patenting of technologies scanning probe microscopy патентование технологий сканирующая зондовая микроскопия
I suppose the process of acceptance will pass through the usual four stages: 1) This is worthless nonsense, 2) This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view, 3) This is true, but quite unimportant, 4) I always said so". This aphorism belongs to the British scientist John Burdon Sanderson Haldane [1]. New technologies and equipment often go through the same stages. There are many examples of it.
In the nineteenth century, the possibility of the conversion of one element to the other was considered pseudoscience. Ernest Rutherford, who discovered the atomic nucleus, told about the impossibility of the creation of the atomic bomb. In 1933, he wrote: "The energy produced by the breaking down of the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine" [2].
Ideas of the German chemist Ida Noddack about possibility of separation of atomic nuclei under the influence of neutrons were considered as absurd by Enrico Fermi and many other famous scientists. In the early 1930s, even Albert Einstein was of the same opinion, despite already received the formula "E=mc2", which implies a huge energy contained in a single atomic nucleus. He said: "There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will". Only after Leo Szilard's discovery of the nuclear chain reaction, Einstein has changed his mind, has joined the development of the nuclear power and has convinced U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the possibility of creating of a super-weapon. In 1942, the world's first nuclear reactor was created under the leadership of Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard at the University of Chicago, and on July 16, 1945 the world's first nuclear weapons test took place in the desolate White Sands deserts of New Mexico.
In 1920s and 1930s the ideas about the exploration of space of one of the founders of modern rocketry, Robert Goddart were subjected to ridicule. He was accused of ignorance of the school curriculum, namely – of the relationship of action and reaction, and that the vacuum is not sufficient to produce the driving force of a jet engine. The Dirac equation, which predicted the existence of antimatter and of the spin of the electron, initially was not accepted by his contemporaries. Knowledge about the spin of the electron now used in the design of modern electronics. Knowledge of the electron spin is used in the design of modern electronics. Stephen Hawking wrote in this regard: "Dirac would have made a fortune if he had patented the Dirac equation. He would have had a royalty on every television, walkman, video game and computer".
An interesting example, associated with the history of scanning probe microscopy (SPM), was already mentioned in [3]. When inventors of the first scanning tunneling microscope (STM) Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer have announced, that with the help of a needle, that is visible to the naked eye, you can see individual atoms of conductive samples (patent US4343993), many scientists didn't believe it. And only after awarding Binnig and Rohrer the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1986, research on this topic all over the world has accelerated. In 1988 the patent US4724318 on atomic force microscope (AFM) was obtained, allowing to investigate the dielectrics at the atomic level, and further, the number of developments and patents in this area began to increase exponentially.
There is a wish to finish the story about the difficulties of promoting of new technologies with the following example. The history of computers has nearly two centuries, in particular, a remarkable prediction about their widest use was made in the mid-nineteenth century by Ada Lovelace, daughter of the English poet Byron [4]. Serious practical developments in this area appeared in the 40-ies of XX century, but the chairman and CEO of IBM Thomas Watson in 1943 said: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers".
So what to do if the technology is developed, brings results, but is in the first stage of development, when the world's authorities believe, that "it can't be" or "it is useless"? To wait until all start using it, or try to patent it, despite of opinion of authorities? If the inventor in addition to awareness of his greatness, are interested in the financial side of the question, of course, to patent it! The issues of patenting of inventions, based on the discoveries, have discussed in [5,6]. In the 4th issue of the journal was published an article "Patenting of methods in the high-tech area", devoted to the tactics of patenting of methods and their protection through patenting of devices. Now we will consider the principles of protection of essentially new technologies.
The patenting of method of detection of toxic proteins
The first example relates to a method of detection of toxic proteins based on scanning probe microscopy [7], stated in 2003. In the XX century the analysis of toxic proteins was based on secondary information, which appeared after their interaction with monoclonal antibodies, which were extended and complicated process and made it less sensitive. In the proposed solution was offered first, as in the known technology, to ensure the interaction of monoclonal antibodies with toxic proteins, but then to perform a direct measurement of the sizes of the resulting clusters using AFM. The diameter of the antibodies is approximately 4 nm, but after interaction with toxic protein it increases by about 1.5 times. Seems to be very simple: took substrate was fixed on her antibodies, measured their sizes, caused the analyzed solution, dried and spent the second dimension. If the characteristic sizes of ledges on a surface didn't change, in solution toxic proteins aren't present and if increased by 1,5 times – that is. But this is only in theory.
The invention was born from a group of biologists and physicists, specialists in scanning probe microscopy. Biologists have proposed a technology of cleaning of the substrate, fastening on them antibodies, preparation of a solution with toxic proteins, remove impurities and drying of the substrate for holding the probe measurements. Physicists have proposed methods of measuring very specific objects using AFM. The problem was how to adapt these two technologies together. At the level of intuition, based on a deep knowledge of processes, it was assumed that the association may, but the practical implementation of the method required at least one year. The proposed solution was brand new, but work in this direction in the world was actively conducted, and the inventors decided to "stake" the technology to its full implementation.
Was taken brainstorming to create the most complete umbrella of the claims, and the method has been developed. It was proposed to conduct the following studies: four test fields of the substrate (standard, neutral, intermediate, and working); in a liquid medium and with the activation of the test field by ultrasound before immobilization of anti-toxic molecules of monoclonal antibodies and before the finish measurement; freezing the formed clusters after application of the metal coating; after you create on their surface charge and covalent bonds. By the time of filing RU2003121587 not been one of these proposals, and most importantly, has not been carried out measurements in real size clusters of protein-antibody. While the application was being considered, was carried out experimental work. Of course, the examination has sent the request and asked the measurement results, confirming the possibility of the method. The answer to the query included all theoretical considerations, confirming the possibility of the method, but again without results. Followed by a second request. Results still was not, therefore, in order to save time, the applicant has proposed to organize an expert meeting, and it managed to get the first image of the surface of test fields with antibodies, but clusters of protein-antibody were still faintly visible. The meeting managed to persuade experts to the second meeting, which were obtained acceptable image clusters. As well as claims from the very beginning was quite full, and the description contained many potential distinguishing characteristics, after minor adjustments of the claims, the patent was issued. The examination lasted for more than two years, so the actual priority of invention was obtained two years before the confirmation of the feasibility of the method.
The patenting of a method
for evaluating quality of vaccines
In the patenting of a method for evaluating quality of vaccines [8] was used the experience gained during the development and patenting of the previous method. The essence of the invention also included the measurement of nanometer sizes of biological objects on the surface of specially prepared substrates. On such a substrate is applied vaccine viral particles and viral fragments. In particular, it was used in the preparation of live measles vaccine, which is used in Russia for the prevention of measles. After incubation and removal of the liquid, the particle size was studied by using SPM and the conclusion about the quality of the vaccine was made according to the ratio of the number of whole particles and their fragments.
What can be measured geometrical parameters such biological objects was confirmed by the development of the previous method is simplified the task of patenting. But at the time of filing, not all problems of practical implementation of the method have been solved. For example, the particles often blended with each other. This problem was solved by selecting the variants of incubation, and by dilution of the vaccine in a fairly wide range (from 1:1000 to 1:10000). The problem of counting particles along the border, was solved by the second scan with a larger size of the scan. And, of course, the modes of measurement probe microscope were maximally extended: using luminescent coatings in near-field mode of optical microscope; in measuring modes of hardness, Young's modulus and friction; the research efforts of the shear components of the vaccine on the surface of the substrate.
All of these techniques have been in the original application materials, but not all have been implemented at the time of its filing. The examination process, with use of tested tactics, lasted for more than 2.5 years, and had achieved the desired results, confirming the possibility of the method, and the patent [8] was obtained. On the same date, the date of priority ahead of the confirmation of the feasibility of the methods.
The patenting of a method
of processing a solid surface
As a next example, consider a method of processing a solid surface [9]. Usually the technology, which is patented as a method, can be represented as a sequence of actions. The actions themselves, if they are not similar to the manipulation of the medieval alchemists with frog heads and snake tails, the expert suspicion will not cause. Given the General principle of science, which suggests that the new include is known as a private component, we can assume that the new technology together with new and sometimes unexpected results will include quite predictable improvement over traditional characteristics. This was present in the technology described in the patent [9].
In the invention in the processing of solid objects was proposed using the first mechanism 6 (1) and the second mechanism 13, to carry out a circular movement of the tool 11 and the workpiece 3 with a certain ratio of frequencies. Movement of an arbitrary point of the tool 11 and the object 3 set of different trajectories cycloidal curves with additional supply of ultrasonic vibrations with a certain frequency ratio, which provided the first 4 and 12 second-generation devices. At the moment of contact of the tool 11 and the object 3 in the contact area can be served from the device 19 a solution of surface active substances (surfactants) on the basis of fluorine-containing oligomers with the addition of ultra-fine diamond abrasive (UDA). The grain size of UDA in this case may be about 5 nm.
The pressure unit 16 of the tool 11 on the object 3 with a certain periodicity in time to change a pressure in the range from 2.5∙105 to 6.0∙105 PA, which increases the efficiency effects of surfactants and UDA on the surface of the object 3. The use of this method of treatment provides a surface roughness of the diamond plate (3) in the range from 0.16 to 1.9 nm. The surface roughness of the diamond plates after processing can reach Ra=0,54 nm, RMS roughness Rq =0,70 nm, the scale heights Rmax=6,48 nm.
The described method of processing have made it possible for on a solid surface, molecular beam epitaxy, which allowed to grow on the diamond plate single-crystal film of silicon.
When conducting experiments also revealed that there are additional technical results that do not have at this time an unambiguous theoretical explanation, and many luminaries of science were on the way to Fermi and Einstein (what we talked about above) and didn't want to admit the unusual results of the experiments. And to insure that these results in the application was not carried out, which enabled without difficulty to obtain a patent. However, some of these results were published in the press with reference to the device, similar to those shown in fig.1, i.e. protection of technology was implemented comprehensively: and through the patenting process, and through protective publications.
Patenting of new technologies,
recognized by the scientific community
The fourth example concerns the patenting of new technologies, described in scientific publications and recognized by the scientific community. A positive consequence of this is that problems of proof industrial applicability of the technology should not be, as it is possible to refer to previous publications as examples of its use. On the other hand, if the time of publication until the priority date (filing) it has been more than six months, according to article 1350 paragraph 3 of the Civil code, the examination may oppose these publications patented technology, and not to recognize it patentable.
About the discovery of the phenomenon of radiation superfluidity of X-ray radiation capable of forming a highly stable quasi-monochromatic X-ray flux of nanoscale width as it passes between the two reflectors located at a distance of 100-200 nm between them, already mentioned in [5,6]. Here let's look at it from a different angle.
The essence of the effect of radiation of superfluidity of x-ray radiation is the following. X-ray radiation is slid into the gap 1 (fig.2) between the walls 9, 10 of the reflectors 2, 3, and it is, contrary to previous views, not only through it, but also changes its characteristics in the best way and can be used with high efficiency in a wide range of areas, for example, nanodiffraction, testing spectrometry, radiotherapy. But when preparing applications for solid-state waveguide-resonance shaper flow x-ray monochromatic radiation (RU2010116853 filed 29.04.2010) had to take into account previous publications and to keep in mind that the main characteristics of the driver of the stream has been described before beginning work on the preparation of this application, in 2004 and 2007, in well-known international journal of X-Ray Spectrometry. Given this fact, had claims to build on the basis of the design features of the device: body 4 is sealed; use input and output radiolucent window, made of Mylar; different versions of the walls 9, 10 and the ends of the reflectors 5, 6, 7, 8; the application of various materials reflectors 2, 3 and coatings; the introduction of additional reflectors with different shapes and angles of the location of reflecting surfaces.
In this situation the umbrella of patent protection of the new technology was implemented through patenting devices. However, in each situation it is necessary given the extent of the disclosure of the technology in previous publications, in order to correctly choose the subject matter. And, of course, in any case, the claims should be prepared with the maximum number of dependent claims and in the description to bring the maximum number of options for their execution.
In the application RU2010116853 due to the completeness of the primary descriptions managed to defend 11 dependent claims, which helped to secure a sufficient number of options for the development of a new direction associated with the discovery of superfluidity of X-ray radiation. It should also be noted that simultaneously with the registration of this application, was filed application RU2010116852 on the shaper of little divergent flows of radiation. This application did not include a description of any new technology, however, in the structures of both inventions had a lot in common. On the one hand, it was necessary to properly post similar signs in two applications, with the other he wanted something similar to the new technology to insert the second application, in case of rejection first. This was done by the introduction of the 7-th and 8-th claims of the x-ray mirrors of a special form. Just this formula was 14 dependent distinctive points, and the patent was obtained at 27.06.2013 [10]. If the first application was rejected, he could play a certain role of a fashion model associated with the new technology.
Thus, the patenting of new technologies it is possible: to their full implementation; in the case of obtaining results that go beyond traditional ideas of the present day; and after disclosure of the nature of technology unlimited circle of persons. ■
In the nineteenth century, the possibility of the conversion of one element to the other was considered pseudoscience. Ernest Rutherford, who discovered the atomic nucleus, told about the impossibility of the creation of the atomic bomb. In 1933, he wrote: "The energy produced by the breaking down of the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine" [2].
Ideas of the German chemist Ida Noddack about possibility of separation of atomic nuclei under the influence of neutrons were considered as absurd by Enrico Fermi and many other famous scientists. In the early 1930s, even Albert Einstein was of the same opinion, despite already received the formula "E=mc2", which implies a huge energy contained in a single atomic nucleus. He said: "There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will". Only after Leo Szilard's discovery of the nuclear chain reaction, Einstein has changed his mind, has joined the development of the nuclear power and has convinced U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the possibility of creating of a super-weapon. In 1942, the world's first nuclear reactor was created under the leadership of Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard at the University of Chicago, and on July 16, 1945 the world's first nuclear weapons test took place in the desolate White Sands deserts of New Mexico.
In 1920s and 1930s the ideas about the exploration of space of one of the founders of modern rocketry, Robert Goddart were subjected to ridicule. He was accused of ignorance of the school curriculum, namely – of the relationship of action and reaction, and that the vacuum is not sufficient to produce the driving force of a jet engine. The Dirac equation, which predicted the existence of antimatter and of the spin of the electron, initially was not accepted by his contemporaries. Knowledge about the spin of the electron now used in the design of modern electronics. Knowledge of the electron spin is used in the design of modern electronics. Stephen Hawking wrote in this regard: "Dirac would have made a fortune if he had patented the Dirac equation. He would have had a royalty on every television, walkman, video game and computer".
An interesting example, associated with the history of scanning probe microscopy (SPM), was already mentioned in [3]. When inventors of the first scanning tunneling microscope (STM) Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer have announced, that with the help of a needle, that is visible to the naked eye, you can see individual atoms of conductive samples (patent US4343993), many scientists didn't believe it. And only after awarding Binnig and Rohrer the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1986, research on this topic all over the world has accelerated. In 1988 the patent US4724318 on atomic force microscope (AFM) was obtained, allowing to investigate the dielectrics at the atomic level, and further, the number of developments and patents in this area began to increase exponentially.
There is a wish to finish the story about the difficulties of promoting of new technologies with the following example. The history of computers has nearly two centuries, in particular, a remarkable prediction about their widest use was made in the mid-nineteenth century by Ada Lovelace, daughter of the English poet Byron [4]. Serious practical developments in this area appeared in the 40-ies of XX century, but the chairman and CEO of IBM Thomas Watson in 1943 said: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers".
So what to do if the technology is developed, brings results, but is in the first stage of development, when the world's authorities believe, that "it can't be" or "it is useless"? To wait until all start using it, or try to patent it, despite of opinion of authorities? If the inventor in addition to awareness of his greatness, are interested in the financial side of the question, of course, to patent it! The issues of patenting of inventions, based on the discoveries, have discussed in [5,6]. In the 4th issue of the journal was published an article "Patenting of methods in the high-tech area", devoted to the tactics of patenting of methods and their protection through patenting of devices. Now we will consider the principles of protection of essentially new technologies.
The patenting of method of detection of toxic proteins
The first example relates to a method of detection of toxic proteins based on scanning probe microscopy [7], stated in 2003. In the XX century the analysis of toxic proteins was based on secondary information, which appeared after their interaction with monoclonal antibodies, which were extended and complicated process and made it less sensitive. In the proposed solution was offered first, as in the known technology, to ensure the interaction of monoclonal antibodies with toxic proteins, but then to perform a direct measurement of the sizes of the resulting clusters using AFM. The diameter of the antibodies is approximately 4 nm, but after interaction with toxic protein it increases by about 1.5 times. Seems to be very simple: took substrate was fixed on her antibodies, measured their sizes, caused the analyzed solution, dried and spent the second dimension. If the characteristic sizes of ledges on a surface didn't change, in solution toxic proteins aren't present and if increased by 1,5 times – that is. But this is only in theory.
The invention was born from a group of biologists and physicists, specialists in scanning probe microscopy. Biologists have proposed a technology of cleaning of the substrate, fastening on them antibodies, preparation of a solution with toxic proteins, remove impurities and drying of the substrate for holding the probe measurements. Physicists have proposed methods of measuring very specific objects using AFM. The problem was how to adapt these two technologies together. At the level of intuition, based on a deep knowledge of processes, it was assumed that the association may, but the practical implementation of the method required at least one year. The proposed solution was brand new, but work in this direction in the world was actively conducted, and the inventors decided to "stake" the technology to its full implementation.
Was taken brainstorming to create the most complete umbrella of the claims, and the method has been developed. It was proposed to conduct the following studies: four test fields of the substrate (standard, neutral, intermediate, and working); in a liquid medium and with the activation of the test field by ultrasound before immobilization of anti-toxic molecules of monoclonal antibodies and before the finish measurement; freezing the formed clusters after application of the metal coating; after you create on their surface charge and covalent bonds. By the time of filing RU2003121587 not been one of these proposals, and most importantly, has not been carried out measurements in real size clusters of protein-antibody. While the application was being considered, was carried out experimental work. Of course, the examination has sent the request and asked the measurement results, confirming the possibility of the method. The answer to the query included all theoretical considerations, confirming the possibility of the method, but again without results. Followed by a second request. Results still was not, therefore, in order to save time, the applicant has proposed to organize an expert meeting, and it managed to get the first image of the surface of test fields with antibodies, but clusters of protein-antibody were still faintly visible. The meeting managed to persuade experts to the second meeting, which were obtained acceptable image clusters. As well as claims from the very beginning was quite full, and the description contained many potential distinguishing characteristics, after minor adjustments of the claims, the patent was issued. The examination lasted for more than two years, so the actual priority of invention was obtained two years before the confirmation of the feasibility of the method.
The patenting of a method
for evaluating quality of vaccines
In the patenting of a method for evaluating quality of vaccines [8] was used the experience gained during the development and patenting of the previous method. The essence of the invention also included the measurement of nanometer sizes of biological objects on the surface of specially prepared substrates. On such a substrate is applied vaccine viral particles and viral fragments. In particular, it was used in the preparation of live measles vaccine, which is used in Russia for the prevention of measles. After incubation and removal of the liquid, the particle size was studied by using SPM and the conclusion about the quality of the vaccine was made according to the ratio of the number of whole particles and their fragments.
What can be measured geometrical parameters such biological objects was confirmed by the development of the previous method is simplified the task of patenting. But at the time of filing, not all problems of practical implementation of the method have been solved. For example, the particles often blended with each other. This problem was solved by selecting the variants of incubation, and by dilution of the vaccine in a fairly wide range (from 1:1000 to 1:10000). The problem of counting particles along the border, was solved by the second scan with a larger size of the scan. And, of course, the modes of measurement probe microscope were maximally extended: using luminescent coatings in near-field mode of optical microscope; in measuring modes of hardness, Young's modulus and friction; the research efforts of the shear components of the vaccine on the surface of the substrate.
All of these techniques have been in the original application materials, but not all have been implemented at the time of its filing. The examination process, with use of tested tactics, lasted for more than 2.5 years, and had achieved the desired results, confirming the possibility of the method, and the patent [8] was obtained. On the same date, the date of priority ahead of the confirmation of the feasibility of the methods.
The patenting of a method
of processing a solid surface
As a next example, consider a method of processing a solid surface [9]. Usually the technology, which is patented as a method, can be represented as a sequence of actions. The actions themselves, if they are not similar to the manipulation of the medieval alchemists with frog heads and snake tails, the expert suspicion will not cause. Given the General principle of science, which suggests that the new include is known as a private component, we can assume that the new technology together with new and sometimes unexpected results will include quite predictable improvement over traditional characteristics. This was present in the technology described in the patent [9].
In the invention in the processing of solid objects was proposed using the first mechanism 6 (1) and the second mechanism 13, to carry out a circular movement of the tool 11 and the workpiece 3 with a certain ratio of frequencies. Movement of an arbitrary point of the tool 11 and the object 3 set of different trajectories cycloidal curves with additional supply of ultrasonic vibrations with a certain frequency ratio, which provided the first 4 and 12 second-generation devices. At the moment of contact of the tool 11 and the object 3 in the contact area can be served from the device 19 a solution of surface active substances (surfactants) on the basis of fluorine-containing oligomers with the addition of ultra-fine diamond abrasive (UDA). The grain size of UDA in this case may be about 5 nm.
The pressure unit 16 of the tool 11 on the object 3 with a certain periodicity in time to change a pressure in the range from 2.5∙105 to 6.0∙105 PA, which increases the efficiency effects of surfactants and UDA on the surface of the object 3. The use of this method of treatment provides a surface roughness of the diamond plate (3) in the range from 0.16 to 1.9 nm. The surface roughness of the diamond plates after processing can reach Ra=0,54 nm, RMS roughness Rq =0,70 nm, the scale heights Rmax=6,48 nm.
The described method of processing have made it possible for on a solid surface, molecular beam epitaxy, which allowed to grow on the diamond plate single-crystal film of silicon.
When conducting experiments also revealed that there are additional technical results that do not have at this time an unambiguous theoretical explanation, and many luminaries of science were on the way to Fermi and Einstein (what we talked about above) and didn't want to admit the unusual results of the experiments. And to insure that these results in the application was not carried out, which enabled without difficulty to obtain a patent. However, some of these results were published in the press with reference to the device, similar to those shown in fig.1, i.e. protection of technology was implemented comprehensively: and through the patenting process, and through protective publications.
Patenting of new technologies,
recognized by the scientific community
The fourth example concerns the patenting of new technologies, described in scientific publications and recognized by the scientific community. A positive consequence of this is that problems of proof industrial applicability of the technology should not be, as it is possible to refer to previous publications as examples of its use. On the other hand, if the time of publication until the priority date (filing) it has been more than six months, according to article 1350 paragraph 3 of the Civil code, the examination may oppose these publications patented technology, and not to recognize it patentable.
About the discovery of the phenomenon of radiation superfluidity of X-ray radiation capable of forming a highly stable quasi-monochromatic X-ray flux of nanoscale width as it passes between the two reflectors located at a distance of 100-200 nm between them, already mentioned in [5,6]. Here let's look at it from a different angle.
The essence of the effect of radiation of superfluidity of x-ray radiation is the following. X-ray radiation is slid into the gap 1 (fig.2) between the walls 9, 10 of the reflectors 2, 3, and it is, contrary to previous views, not only through it, but also changes its characteristics in the best way and can be used with high efficiency in a wide range of areas, for example, nanodiffraction, testing spectrometry, radiotherapy. But when preparing applications for solid-state waveguide-resonance shaper flow x-ray monochromatic radiation (RU2010116853 filed 29.04.2010) had to take into account previous publications and to keep in mind that the main characteristics of the driver of the stream has been described before beginning work on the preparation of this application, in 2004 and 2007, in well-known international journal of X-Ray Spectrometry. Given this fact, had claims to build on the basis of the design features of the device: body 4 is sealed; use input and output radiolucent window, made of Mylar; different versions of the walls 9, 10 and the ends of the reflectors 5, 6, 7, 8; the application of various materials reflectors 2, 3 and coatings; the introduction of additional reflectors with different shapes and angles of the location of reflecting surfaces.
In this situation the umbrella of patent protection of the new technology was implemented through patenting devices. However, in each situation it is necessary given the extent of the disclosure of the technology in previous publications, in order to correctly choose the subject matter. And, of course, in any case, the claims should be prepared with the maximum number of dependent claims and in the description to bring the maximum number of options for their execution.
In the application RU2010116853 due to the completeness of the primary descriptions managed to defend 11 dependent claims, which helped to secure a sufficient number of options for the development of a new direction associated with the discovery of superfluidity of X-ray radiation. It should also be noted that simultaneously with the registration of this application, was filed application RU2010116852 on the shaper of little divergent flows of radiation. This application did not include a description of any new technology, however, in the structures of both inventions had a lot in common. On the one hand, it was necessary to properly post similar signs in two applications, with the other he wanted something similar to the new technology to insert the second application, in case of rejection first. This was done by the introduction of the 7-th and 8-th claims of the x-ray mirrors of a special form. Just this formula was 14 dependent distinctive points, and the patent was obtained at 27.06.2013 [10]. If the first application was rejected, he could play a certain role of a fashion model associated with the new technology.
Thus, the patenting of new technologies it is possible: to their full implementation; in the case of obtaining results that go beyond traditional ideas of the present day; and after disclosure of the nature of technology unlimited circle of persons. ■
Readers feedback
