The trickiness of the technical description phraseology

Very often an text from another patent must be inserted into a patent application, almost verbatim. This practice would equal an implicit admission of a prior art anticipating (rendering non-novel) the application, had the application not used this standard verbiage

The …which is incorporated by reference for all purposes as if fully set forth herein

Very often the language of the technical description within the patent application must be technically correct, though not necessarily precise in engineering terms, while enabling, by teaching a literate technical person to manufacture the invention:

The angular divergence of gimbal roll axis 64 from platform roll axis 68 in Figures 3A-3C has been exaggerated for illustrational clarity.

the line drawings in patent submissions may be surprisingly simple, sometimes hand-drawn, though neat, in their black-and-white monotony. They do not need to be precise, nor truly representative. A propeller blade, the turboprop engine and the unique hub may look as if drawn by a tidy elementary school pupil.

More of the cautionary, self-protective CYA verbiage:

It is to be understood that the...descriptions below are illustrative, and are not intended to…

does not restrict the present invention to the specific details set forth below…

It will be recognized by those with skill in the art that…

...known in the art

At the end of the introductory section, there must be an formula that proves the application's compliance with the US Patent laws' Paragraph 101, that the invention is presents a solution to the public need due to the disadvantages of the existing prior art:

...a widely recognized need for... which would overcome the disadvantages of presently known

Isn't it easy?

On the importance of turbocompressors

Once I had to write a patent on a high tech, high-octane gasoline which was about 30 numbers above Turbo Blue, the usual mainstay of all dragracers, motorcycle aficionados and derivatives thereof. I remember that most engines, no matter how souped up or customized could take a gulp of energy-packed aromatic hydrocarbon, high-entropy fuel. Only few of turbochargers survived the racetrack test. Guys who usually like to refer to turbochargers as angry snails were the guys whose engine blew up first. When someone's engine is turbocharged, the turbocharger becomes the real heart of the heart of the car. It is of utmost importance that the engine is matched to the turbocharger. The most delusional, if I can say that, were VW and Audi owners who wanted to tinker with their street-legal cars and somehow give themselves more horsepower for passing everyone else during an ego trip while returning from a hockey game. The utterly important part of turbocharging these German automobiles is making sure that their engines receive the genuine, native turbochargers. In US these state-of the-art turbocompressors can be obtained from this vw turbocharger outlet. They have an extensive selection of turbochargers for almost any make of VW and Audi. If you own one, that's where you are better off ordering.

CANADIAN SUPREME COURT: HARVARD MOUSE CAN'T BE PATENTED

Globe and Mail (www.globeandmail.com) reports that the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 that the Harvard oncomouse cannot be patented. The majority decision written by Justice Michel Bastarache says: "The Canadian federal Patent Act] in its current form fails to address many of the unique concerns that are raised by the patenting of higher life forms.", and that the oncomouse does not fit the definition of invention written into the federal Patent Act in the 19th century. Activists are happy - the industry unhappy - with the decision. I guess we are to think that the oncomouse is all things but it is not a result of a technical process.