Our tipster received a copy of this U.S. patent and assumed it was a hoax. It’s real, issued last December. What does this say about the competency and purpose of the US Patent Office? Why not just buy a rubber stamp and not bother reading the applications? This kind of stuff is abuse of the system.
Good news everyone! The Patent Office has granted a patent on a cure for cancer.
Last December, the Patent Office issued Patent No. 8,609,158 on a “potent drug” that “rebukes cancer, cancer cells, and kills cancer.” According to the patent, this drug cures a litany of other maladies. What is this wonderful invention, you ask? It is a combination of “evening primrose oil, rice, sesame seeds, green beans, coffee, meat, cheese, milk, green tea extract, evening primrose seeds, and wine.” As the patent’s abstract says, “it works.”
This patent’s most obvious flaw is lack of utility – there’s no proof that the invention works. But the system places the burden of proof on the Patent Office, not the person asking for a 20 year monopoly. The examiner likely decided a rejection was not worth the effort – frankly, we wonder whether the examiner even read the application. In a similar case, the Patent Office issued a patent to an applicant whose work was widely known to be fraudulent. (The purported inventor had even spent time in jail for the fraud.)
The inventor sounds deluded. A portion of the original application which does not appear in the final patent stated:
“You may wonder why I don’t obey Dr.’s? It is because they do not understand the word of God. I am a minister who was diagnosed with Bi-Polar, Lymph-node cancer and many other issues. I found a group of ingredients that when processed correctly solve these issues in such a way as to not ever take chemo-therapy, burn yourself incorrectly and harm the very body you are trying to save….”
Oh my. The article makes note of the numerous grounds on which the application should have been rejected. Mark, who practices Patent Law, tells Doubtful News that it is not at all unusual to see the Patent Office failing to do a proper job of examining applications (both in not rejecting bad application and refusing good ones). They are inundated by thousands of applications and do a quick review instead of examining even the obvious questions like does it work and is it an actual new invention.
Sounds like a big issue that needs to be fixed but how do you efficiently approve the valid requests when you are deluged with nonsense?
Tip: Mark Mollon