Informal Drawings is a comic-strip devoted to patent attorneys, examiners, and inventors. New comics are published weekly.

Prints and coffee mugs may be purchased at


Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author as of the time of publication and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of

Join the Discussion

11 comments so far. Add my comment.

  • [Avatar for Anon]
    October 10, 2020 01:46 pm


    I certainly hope that you do not apply all platitudes in a wooden and unthinking manner.

    While certainly editing for unnecessary words is a ‘best practice’ (and noting your tendency for Motherhood and Apple Pie statements in a vacuum), you ask me questions that I would put directly back to you in this instance. Without the words ‘for maximizing revenue,’ does the claim on its face read towards any indicated utility? Do the words in the preamble breathe ANY life into the claim?

    Of course, you and I may well differ on views of our respective Sovereigns have taken in regards to “Business Methods.”

    I of course, fully acknowledge your Sovereign’s choices, just as you have ever NOT fully acknowledged our Sovereign’s choices.

    This of course is MORE than your “yes, so the cartoon would work.”

  • [Avatar for Paul Cole]
    Paul Cole
    October 10, 2020 05:24 am


    The Super Supper March was apparently written by Dr Seuss. My children learned it in kindergarten.

  • [Avatar for MaxDrei]
    October 9, 2020 02:00 am

    Hi anon. Is there “something amiss”? I wondered.

    When I was new to the profession, 40 years ago, it was explained to me that one should critically review one’s draft claim, and strike out all words that are not strictly necessary. Here, are the words “for maximizing revenue” strictly necessary? What do you think? If they are necessary, why is that?

    I will answer my own question with a yes because without them the cartoon would not “work”. But is that a good enough reason to have the words in the claim?

    Mark, I laughed at your claim numbering. Good one, cobber!

    Paul, always learn something from you. I had never heard of the Super Supper March.

  • [Avatar for Pro Say]
    Pro Say
    October 8, 2020 04:51 pm

    Sorry Mark, not eligible because … well, just because.

    (hmmmm … perhaps the one with the horns is actually the CAFC (other two remain Facebook and Google))

  • [Avatar for Mark Summerfield]
    Mark Summerfield
    October 8, 2020 04:34 pm

    Aaaargh! @*#$ autocorrect!

    No problem. We’ll amend during prosecution.

  • [Avatar for John Whitner]
    John Whitner
    October 8, 2020 04:21 pm

    I believe Mark meant “comprising”. Great, but evil claim, Mark. Love the comics, Mr. Sleman, please keep them coming.

  • [Avatar for Anon]
    October 8, 2020 10:27 am

    Mark, I like the attempt, but would find the claim term of “confusing” problematic.

  • [Avatar for Mark Summerfield]
    Mark Summerfield
    October 8, 2020 08:31 am

    666. A method of maximising revenue comprising:
    – selling hot dogs in packs confusing a first number of items; and
    – selling hot dog buns in sets comprising a second number of items,
    wherein said first number and said second number have no common divisor.

    667. The method of claim 666 wherein said first number is seven and said second number is 11.

  • [Avatar for Paul Cole]
    Paul Cole
    October 7, 2020 04:15 am

    I am delighted that the Devil has now graduated from college and law school and is taking an interest in our profession. However, I am not sure that even the hungriest customer would want to eat eight hot dogs all at once. I am reminded of the Super-Supper March: “Hungry, hungry I am hungry. Table, table here I come. I could eat a goose-moose burger. Fifteen pickles and a purple plum.”

  • [Avatar for Pro Say]
    Pro Say
    October 6, 2020 06:54 pm

    I dunno. Looks like Apple with the horns; Google and Facebook shaking hands to me …

  • [Avatar for Anon]
    October 6, 2020 04:00 pm

    I almost have to presume that the caped and horned individual must be Patent Counsel….

    (picking up on MaxDrei’s ‘typical’ if patents are involved, something amiss must be afoot)

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *