What does it take to turn a gym-floor problem into a protectable product? In this episode of Patent Pending Made Simple, attorney Samar Shah sits down with patent attorney Bobby and young inventor Logan to unpack a real invention aimed at strengthening the tibialis anterior (goodbye, shin splints). Together they walk through the provisional → non-provisional journey, how to think about 101 eligibility, novelty/non-obviousness, whether to form an LLC vs. a C-Corp, when to file Track One (fast-track), and how trademarks and copyrights fit into a go-to-market plan. They wrap with a practical look at commercialization: manufacturing it yourself vs. licensing the patent.

Here’s what you’ll learn

The patentability checklist for physical products: 101 eligibility, novelty, non-obviousness
Provisional vs. non-provisional timing (and when to accelerate with Track One)
Entity basics: LLC now or Delaware C-Corp later—how fundraising shapes the choice
Trademarks by class, quick competitive research, and naming (hello, Shin-credible)
Copyright for drawings, photos, and marketing assets
Two paths to revenue: build & sell vs. license—and how your choice affects IP strategy

Why it matters
For inventors and startup teams, aligning IP with your business model can be the difference between a clever idea and a durable asset. This episode shows how to evaluate patentability, structure the filing strategy, and pick a commercialization path that fits your goals.

Chapters

Chapter 1: Meet the Inventors
How a soccer problem turned into an idea to strengthen the tibialis anterior—and a memorable name: Shin-credible.

Chapter 2: Is It Patentable?
101 eligibility for physical devices, and a practical test for novelty and non-obviousness.

Chapter 3: Provisional → Non-Provisional
When to convert, why most teams use the full 12 months, and when Track One is worth it.

Chapter 4: LLC, C-Corp & Investors
Limiting liability now vs. structuring for venture capital later.

Chapter 5: Trademarks & Names
Picking classes, researching competitors, and why categories matter.

Chapter 6: Copyright in the Real World
What creative assets you can protect around the product.

Chapter 7: Make It or License It?
Manufacturing realities, finding partners, and the licensing alternative.

Chapter 8: Takeaways for Inventors
A simple framework to connect IP decisions to market goals.

What is the true purpose of a patent? Many inventors assume a patent gives them the right to make or sell their invention — but that’s not the case. In this episode, attorneys Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy explain what patents really do, why they matter, and how they fit into a smart business strategy.

Here’s what you’ll learn:

The legal purpose of a patent: the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, or importing your invention.

Why having a patent does not guarantee freedom to operate.

How patents can still overlap, and why “freedom to operate” opinions are critical.

Business benefits of patents: blocking competitors, attracting investors, increasing valuation, and supporting licensing deals.

The often-overlooked marketing value of being “patent pending” or patented.

Practical examples from startups and inventors who used patents as leverage in deals and acquisitions.

Why it matters: A patent is more than a piece of paper — it can be a valuable asset that supports funding, partnerships, acquisitions, and long-term growth. Understanding the purpose of a patent helps inventors and startups align IP with business goals.

Chapter 1: What a Patent Really Means
Unpack the legal foundation of a patent — the right to exclude others, not the right to practice your own invention.

Chapter 2: The Freedom-to-Operate Puzzle
Learn why patents can overlap, and why freedom-to-operate opinions are essential to avoid infringing on others’ rights.

Chapter 3: Litigation Limits
Understand why having your own patent isn’t a shield against lawsuits and how courts view patent evidence in litigation.

Chapter 4: Business Goals & Strategy
Explore how inventors and startups can align patents with goals — from blocking copycats to monetizing through licensing.

Chapter 5: Startup Leverage & Valuation
See how patents boost investor confidence, raise valuations, and provide leverage during acquisitions or partnerships.

Chapter 6: Patents in Partnerships & Cross-Licensing
Discover how patents help clarify rights in joint ventures and reduce licensing costs through cross-licensing deals.

Chapter 7: Marketing & Legitimacy Value
Learn how “patent pending” status deters competitors, adds legitimacy, and becomes a powerful marketing tool.

Chapter 8: Key Takeaways & Closing Insights
Summarize the legal, business, and marketing purposes of patents — and how to make them work for your growth strategy.

What makes a small patent firm different — and why does it matter to inventors? In this episode, attorneys Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy share a candid conversation about what it’s really like to practice at a boutique firm — and how that model benefits both attorneys and clients.

They discuss balancing family life with client deadlines, why direct access to your attorney can change your patent strategy, and how working closely with independent inventors leads to better outcomes and real impact.

Here’s what you’ll learn:
The human side of patent law — how firm culture affects client care.
Why smaller, family-friendly firms can respond faster and more personally.
Real client stories: when the right advice meant spending less, not more.
How removing “billable hour pressure” leads to more genuine guidance.
The long-term benefits of relationships built on trust, not transactions.
Why Outlier chose to serve independent inventors — and how that decision shaped its mission.

Why it matters:
For startups and inventors, choosing the right law firm isn’t just about price — it’s about partnership. A thoughtful, boutique approach can turn legal strategy into long-term success, one idea at a time.

Chapters
Chapter 1: Life at a Small Firm
Jamie shares what it’s like to balance deadlines while being sick — and why a small, family-friendly firm makes it possible to stay human in a demanding profession.

Chapter 2: Lessons from Big-Firm Life
Samar reflects on his time at a large law firm, missing his daughter’s early milestones due to trial schedules — and how that experience shaped his approach to leadership and firm culture.

Chapter 3: The Freedom to Care
Both attorneys discuss how removing strict billable-hour goals and sales metrics creates space for better client service and authentic decision-making.

Chapter 4: Real Client Wins
A story about a client who came in expecting to spend $10,000 on a utility patent — and left with a $3,500 design patent that fit their needs perfectly.

Chapter 5: The Value of Direct Access
Why working directly with experienced attorneys — not layers of sales reps or project managers — leads to better communication and strategy.

Chapter 6: Independent Inventors, Real Impact
How supporting early-stage inventors gives attorneys visible impact — and helps inventors turn ideas into tangible products.

Chapter 7: Building Trust as the True “Moat”
Samar explains why Outlier’s biggest competitive advantage isn’t data or software — it’s relationships, trust, and the accumulated wisdom shared with clients.

Chapter 8: Clients Who Care Back
Heartwarming stories of clients sending baby gifts and congratulations — proof that genuine relationships make the work worthwhile.

Chapter 9: The Bigger Picture
Why helping independent inventors strengthens not only small businesses but also innovation, community, and the economy itself.

Chapter 10: Key Takeaways & Closing Thoughts
A reflection on why a smaller, mission-driven firm can offer both attorneys and clients something larger firms can’t: empathy, accessibility, and meaningful impact.

Do You Need a Prototype Before Filing a Patent? | Protect Your Idea the Smart Way

Do you really need to build a prototype before filing your patent application?
It’s one of the most common questions inventors ask — and the answer isn’t as simple as yes or no. In this episode, attorneys Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy break down when a prototype helps, when it doesn’t, and how to file smartly without wasting time or money.

You’ll learn:
The legal truth: prototypes aren’t required — but enablement is.
How to describe your invention so others can make and use it (without building it first).
When a prototype can reveal what’s truly novel and strengthen your IP.
The risks of filing too broadly — and how it can block your own future patents.
Why a provisional application can be the best of both worlds: protection and flexibility.
How to think like an examiner and spot red flags before filing.

Why it matters:
A well-timed filing protects your idea before disclosure — but filing too early or too vaguely can cost you real protection later. This episode helps inventors and startups understand the line between an idea, an invention, and a patentable disclosure.

Chapter Breakdown

Chapter 1: The Prototype Question
Do you actually need one — or is it just a myth?

Chapter 2: Understanding Enablement
Learn why you don’t need a prototype if your written description fully explains how to make and use your invention.

Chapter 3: The Fine Line Between Idea and Invention
Find out when an idea becomes “patent-eligible” subject matter — and when it’s still too abstract.

Chapter 4: Filing Before Prototyping
When early filing protects you from leaks, theft, or public disclosure.

Chapter 5: Filing After Prototyping
How building a prototype can reveal true points of novelty — and give your patent more strength.

Chapter 6: Avoiding Overly Broad Filings
Why “broad” doesn’t always mean “better,” and how vague filings can block your own improvements later.

Chapter 7: The Role of Provisional Applications
Use provisionals to protect early concepts while you refine your design and manufacturing methods.

Chapter 8: Key Takeaways
Balance protection with progress — file early enough to secure rights, but detailed enough to stand up in examination and licensing.

Welcome to the Patent Pending Made Simple Podcast. In this episode, attorneys Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy discuss an important post-allowance decision: whether to file a continuation or divisional application.

We explain:
What a continuation is and how it allows you to pursue new claim scope while keeping the original filing date.
How a divisional differs and why it often follows a restriction requirement.
Practical reasons to file (such as maintaining flexibility, adapting to market changes, or preserving leverage in licensing).
Reasons not to file, including budget constraints and when business goals are already met.
Common questions from inventors, including whether a continuation affects the strength of the original patent.

We also share a practical example of how a continuation helped a client resolve a competitor dispute without litigation, demonstrating how these filings can be useful tools in the right circumstances.

Why it matters: Once a patent issues, its claims cannot be changed. A continuation or divisional can provide additional options, but whether to file depends on your budget, goals, and competitive environment.

📩 Questions for the hosts?

Jamie: [email protected]
Samar: [email protected]

⚖️ This discussion is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Chapter 1: Introduction & Listener Shout-Out
The hosts kick things off with a special nod to a dedicated listener and share how the podcast audience can submit questions for future episodes.

Chapter 2: Why Post-Allowance Decisions Matter
Explore what happens after a patent application is allowed and why continuation and divisional filings are critical decisions for inventors.

Chapter 3: Continuations Explained
Learn what a continuation application is, how it shares the same specification but introduces new claims, and why the priority date matters.

Chapter 4: Divisionals Explained
Understand how restriction requirements lead to divisional applications and how they differ from continuations while serving a similar purpose.

Chapter 5: Strategic Reasons to File
Discover why inventors use continuations to expand or shift claim scope, adapt to market changes, or keep options open against future competition.

Chapter 6: When Not to File
A candid discussion about budget constraints, business goals, and when it’s smarter to skip a continuation.

Chapter 7: Client Q&A
The hosts answer common inventor questions:

What happens if my continuation gets rejected?

Why is the examiner citing the same references again?

Does filing a continuation mean my first patent was weak?

Chapter 8: Real-World Examples & War Stories
From adapting claim language to competitor marketing materials to using continuations as leverage in licensing talks, hear how strategy plays out in practice.

Chapter 9: Key Takeaways
A wrap-up on the balance of budget, goals, and timing when deciding whether to file a continuation or divisional.

Chapter 10: Closing & Next Steps
Final thoughts, listener contact info, and the reminder that this discussion is educational, not legal advice.

What can a Ouija board, a pumpkin carving kit, and fake fangs teach us about modern patent practice? In this special Halloween episode, attorneys Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy dig into three “spooky” patents from the past — and uncover how concepts like claim scope, enablement, and obviousness still haunt inventors today.

You’ll learn:

Why the original Ouija board patent would never pass modern USPTO standards.
How an 1891 “spirits demonstration” at the Patent Office won approval — literally.
What pumpkin-carving kits reveal about the limits of “kit” patents and claim scope.
Why simply combining known parts (like tools or instructions) rarely makes something patentable.
How the “fangs” patent shows that even old ideas can be re-patented — if your claims are narrow enough.
What crowded vs. blue-ocean patent spaces mean for your claim breadth.
How to think like an examiner when deciding how detailed your application should be.

Why it matters:

From 19th-century curiosities to modern claim drafting, every “spooky” patent tells a story about how innovation and legal strategy evolve together. Whether you’re a startup founder, inventor, or fellow patent attorney, this episode is a reminder that even the strangest inventions have lessons worth learning.

Chapter Breakdown

Chapter 1: Ouija Boards & Enablement — When claims get “haunted” by indefiniteness.
Chapter 2: The Pumpkin Kit Patent — Why “kit” claims can be a trick, not a treat.
Chapter 3: The Fang Patent — How narrow claims still bite in crowded markets.
Chapter 4: Claim Breadth & Prior Art — Finding the sweet spot between protection and rejection.
Chapter 5: Lessons from the Graveyard — What these old patents teach about filing smarter today.

In this episode, hosts Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy tackle a question every inventor faces: What’s the difference between an idea and an invention—and when is it ready for a patent?

What you’ll learn in this episode:

Why ideas aren’t patentable—but inventions are.
Patents don’t protect vague concepts or “what ifs.” They require concrete details. Samar and Jamie explain the legal and practical reasons behind this rule and why it matters for inventors.

The key concept of “reduction to practice.”
Turning an idea into an invention means more than sketching a lightbulb moment. You’ll learn how prototypes, engineering drawings, and technical details shift your concept into patentable territory.

The role of enablement.
The law requires that someone “skilled in the art” could make and use your invention based on your disclosure. The hosts unpack this standard in plain English and show what’s “enough detail” to cross the line.

Examples that bring the concept to life.
From da Vinci’s flying machines to the Wright brothers’ airplane, and from “a toothbrush that cleans teeth by itself” to actual electric toothbrushes—you’ll see how history and modern examples illustrate the fine line between idea and invention.

When to file a provisional patent application.
Filing too early leaves you vulnerable; filing too late means lost protection. Samar and Jamie share practical guidance on when inventors should take the provisional step.

Common mistakes inventors make.
From filing on vague “room-cleaning robots” to skipping critical details like power, tolerances, or mechanisms, the hosts break down the errors that cost inventors valuable protection.

Why this matters:

The difference between an idea and an invention determines whether your patent application gets granted—or rejected. Understanding this distinction can save you thousands in wasted filings and put you on the right path to protecting your IP.

This episode is designed to simplify complex patent law concepts into practical, real-world advice that every independent inventor, startup founder, and entrepreneur can use.

Chapter 1: Introduction & Why This Matters
Hosts Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy set the stage by clarifying why the idea vs. invention distinction is critical—not just wordplay, but a legal dividing line that determines patentability.

Chapter 2: Why Ideas Aren’t Patentable
Explore the legal rules that exclude vague concepts and “what ifs” from patent protection.

Chapter 3: Reduction to Practice
Understand the crucial step that turns a brainstorm into a patentable invention, whether on paper or in prototype form.

Chapter 4: Historical Example
From Leonardo da Vinci’s early flying sketches to the Wright brothers’ functioning airplane, see how abstract ideas become protectable inventions.

Chapter 5: Modern Example: The Toothbrush
A relatable case study on how an “automatic tooth-cleaning device” moves from abstract concept to concrete, patent-ready invention.

Chapter 6: Enablement Standard
Break down the requirement that someone “skilled in the art” must be able to build your invention from your patent disclosure.

Chapter 7: Provisional Filing Timing
Learn when to take the provisional step, balancing risk of filing too early vs. too late.

Chapter 8: Common Mistakes Inventors Make
From filing on vague robots to skipping key parameters like power ranges, discover pitfalls that weaken protection.

Chapter 9: Practical Takeaways
Samar and Jamie share real-world advice for inventors and founders on how to avoid wasted filings and protect innovation strategically.

Chapter 10: Conclusion & Disclaimer
Final reflections, a call for listener questions, and a reminder that the episode is educational—not legal advice.

Join hosts Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy as they dive into the world of patents with expert paralegal Hastings Galloway. Discover the essential role of a patent paralegal, the importance of attention to detail, and the intricacies of patent law. Hastings shares her journey from hospitality to patent law, offering insights into the daily responsibilities and challenges faced by paralegals. Learn how effective communication with your paralegal can lead to successful patent applications and avoid costly mistakes.

00:00 Introduction and Welcome
00:15 Meet Our Special Guest: Hastings Galloway
01:30 Hastings' Journey into Patent Law
03:51 Key Traits of a Successful Patent Paralegal
06:48 A Day in the Life of a Patent Paralegal
10:15 Importance of Accurate Information and Formal Documents
23:29 Post-Allowance Checklist and Final Thoughts
29:01 Conclusion and Farewell

Key Takeaways:
The critical role of attention to detail in patent law. How to effectively communicate with your patent paralegal. The importance of accurate documentation and timely submissions.

Guest: Hastings Galloway, Patent Paralegal

Hosts: Samar Shah and Jamie Brophy

Subscribe now to stay updated on the latest episodes and insights from the world of patents.

Summary
In this episode, an M&A advisor and business broker, Jason Brown talks with Samar Shah about preparing a startup for a successful exit. He emphasizes the importance of having a clear vision and exit plan from the beginning, including various scenarios. He also discusses the benefits of inorganic growth through acquisitions and the need to build a strong team that can operate independently from the founder. Brown highlights the value of understanding the buyer's perspective and de-risking the business to maximize its value.

Takeaways
Have a clear vision and exit plan for your startup from the beginning, including various scenarios.
Consider inorganic growth through acquisitions as a means of entering a market, generating cash flow, and leveraging existing customer relationships.
Build a strong team that can operate independently from the founder, ensuring consistency in messaging and customer experience.
Think from the buyer's perspective and de-risk your business by addressing potential challenges and building value that the buyer doesn't have to create.
Invest in yourself and continue to develop your skills and mindset as a founder to drive the success of your venture.

Chapters
00:00 Introduction and Legal Matters
02:02 The Importance of a Clear Vision and Exit Plan
05:49 Inorganic Growth through Acquisitions
10:56 Building a Strong and Independent Team
13:47 Thinking from the Buyer's Perspective

Summary

In this episode, the hosts discuss the different types of rejections that can be issued by the Patent Office when filing a patent application. They focus on 102 rejections, which are based on prior art, and 103 rejections, which are based on obviousness. They explain the timing of responding to rejections and the options for overcoming them, including amending the claims and making arguments based on the prior art. They also highlight the importance of carefully considering the prosecution history and avoiding creating a messy trail. Overall, they provide a helpful overview of the process of responding to rejections. The content of this podcast should not be interpreted as legal advice. All thoughts and opinions expressed herein are only those from which they came.

Takeaways

The Patent Office can issue various rejections when filing a patent application.

102 rejections are based on prior art, while 103 rejections are based on obviousness.

When responding to rejections, it is important to carefully review the references cited and consider amending the claims.

Arguments based on the prior art should be supported by evidence and should be carefully considered to avoid creating a messy prosecution history.

The timing of responding to rejections is typically three months, with the possibility of extensions.

Chapters

00:00 Introduction and Overview

03:20 Types of Rejections

10:50 Timing of Responding to Rejections

15:04 Responding to 102 Rejections

29:27 Avoiding a Messy Prosecution History

35:06 Conclusion