For the second installation of this week's silly patents discussion, I have included the Snake Walker below:
Claim: A collar for collaring a snake has an elongated collar section forming a physical collar when wrapped around the body portion of the snake. The collar further has a support section for supporting an attachment mechanism for accepting attachment of a tether and a connector system comprising at least two components affixed to strategic portions of the collar section for securing the collar in place around the body portion of the snake. The length of the collar section is such that a portion thereof overlaps itself when fitted around the snake providing an adjustable interface containing separate components of the connector system whereby mating the connector components together. secures the collar in place on the snake. In one embodiment the collar apparatus further includes a concertina movement-neutralization device for reducing concertina movement through the collar.
Analysis: The Snake Walker effectively serves as a leash for a pet snake. With regards to prior art infringement, this apparatus clearly infringes on the same leashes that allow us to walk dogs. The only difference is the length of the leash and the circumference of the collar, but both of these factors seem obvious, in that a POSITA would know to adjust the size of the leash to the size of the animal. This patent should never have been approved!
I straight up laughed in regard to this patent. Pretty funny that you can walk your snake cause that is oh so necessary! Thanks for the info
ReplyDeleteThis is such a funny patent! Thanks for sharing :) I like how you provided the claim and then also gave your own analysis. It was very clear and easy to understand.
ReplyDeleteHey Mo, this patent is a joke! It's quite ridiculous that someone even thought of this! Really enjoyed the post! And great job in lecture on Monday! You facilitated a lively discussion.
ReplyDeleteMo,
ReplyDeleteYou did a great job of breaking down the patent and your explanation from the claim to your analysis. I agree with you on that this patent should infringe on the prior art showing dog leashes. Not sure how this one passed...
Sasha
Mo,
ReplyDeleteThis patent looks hilarious. The picture that you attached does a great job of showing the design and function of the device. I agree with your analysis that the invention clearly infringes on prior art and is only an obvious leap from something that already exists.
Hi Mo,
ReplyDeleteWhat a strange patent indeed! I think you did a great job analyzing it on the basis of prior art infringement. I definitely agree with your point on how it is very similar to dog leases. What are some possible reasons you think the U.S. Patent Office may have given this idea a patent?
Thanks for a great post!