The patents of Maria Montessori

Maria Montessori (1870-1952), the famous Italian educational reformer, had a number of patents for inventions for teaching aids. Although her two American patents have been noted elsewhere, I don't think her eight British patents have been listed. All are available for free online.

Her first application for a patent was in 1908 and was patented in France, Switzerland, Austria and in the USA as US 1103369, Educational device. It was to help children to write.

Her second American patent was applied for in 1913 as US 1173298, Cut-out geometrical figure for didactical purpose. It was a method of teaching geometry.

In Britain, she had patented her first of the eight patents with GB 1912/6706, Apparatus for use in teaching children. That link includes the amended version, from 1916, after a hearing before Justice Sargent where one claim was lost. This probably means someone took her to court but I have not traced the action. It has complex ideas on writing and mathematics and is perhaps in reality two or three separate inventions. The main drawings are given below.

Next there was GB 1914/14481, Apparatus for teaching children geometry. It is similar or identical to the second US patent mentioned above. Below are the main drawings.

Then there is GB 1913/17890, Apparatus for teaching children arithmetic. It is for an abacus with each row having differently coloured beads, to be used in conjunction with cards. Below is the main drawing.

After World War I the British system changed to numeration from 100,001 onwards so the numbers look different. Based on an Italian filing in 1918 is GB 141053, Device for teaching grammar (Italian patents are not available online, and only the Swiss equivalent patent to her first US patent is in Italian). A box contains compartments which are used to house cards of different colours for different parts of speech.

In 1929 Montessori applied from Spain (as for the following British patents) for GB 330422, Teaching young children elementary mathematics. Again it involves different colours, for strips of paper of different widths, each with a number on one side and adhesive on the other.

Also from 1929 is GB 330788, Artificial lighting. A hollow porcelain column has a light at the bottom and a transparent cover at the top. The idea was to provide shadowless light for a children's nursery. It is illustrated below.

Also from 1929 are two patents with the same titles, Teaching young children elementary mathematics. These are GB 332726 and GB 334319. This second patent is again based on the abacus idea and is illustrated below.

Once again this shows how much can be found in patents. In Montessori's case it is probable that books or journal articles cover the same ground, but this is not so for numerous inventors who have put forward their ideas. There are for example 79 British patents between 1914 and 1950 on the principle of teaching counting as listed here.

The Adidas watch that checks your pulse: patent classification problems

There has been a lot of publicity about wearable technology that diagnoses you -- checking your heartbeat or pulse and so on.

When I first heard of this idea I thought of shirts incorporating technology, but most of the interest is in wristwatches. An example is in Adidas' new sensor for athletes, so that training programmes can be planned, and there is a BBC news story on it, Adidas Micoach smartwatch has heart-rate sensor

Now, supposing you wanted to identify inventions by Adidas in that field. You could ask a patent database for Adidas plus keywords such as watch. Better would be to take the patent classification A61B5/024, "Detecting, measuring, or recording pulse rate or heart rate."

This is an IPC -- it will be used by patent offices when they publish patent specifications. A61B5/02438 is a CPC which is a more precise class, not used on the specifications but added to those published by leading Western nations plus the World PCT system. It is for portable devices worn by the patient (or any user, really). It might seem obvious to use that class combined with the company name but it is easy to miss material, so while any detailed search would certainly use it, a second search should always be used with the broader class plus keywords.

Let's call using A61B5/024 for Adidas Search 1, and A61B5/02438 Search 2.

It is still necessary to decide which search box in Espacenet you use: CPC or IPC. The results below give first CPC and then IPC for Search 1 (Search 2 doesn't have an IPC option, as it is not a valid class).

Search 1 gives in CPC 4179 hits, with 2 by Adidas; in IPC 7127 with 5 by Adidas.

Search 2 gives in CPC 3129 hits, with 4 by Adidas.

How can this be ? The apparently broad search found fewer hits by Adidas as CPC, but more with the IPC than the apparently more precise CPC.

Besides the fact that the company may be working in related fields, and double-counting when more than one entry appears for the same invention, a problem is that using simply A61B5/024 says that only that class is wanted. Any specification classified by a more detailed class instead is missed.

Espacenet deals with this problem by allowing anyone searching the classification to enter the class in the search box which automatically selects the subordinate classes. They can then be copied to the search form. This results in a CPC search which we can call Search 3.

Search 3 gives in CPC 12,925 hits, with 7 by Adidas.

These include the intriguingly named Method and system for extracting cardiac parameters from plethysmographic signals, illustrated below.

Six of the seven are for similar coats that do the monitoring etc., while the seventh is not obviously for a watch -- it is a "portable electronic unit" which monitors congestive heart failure patients, and hence obviously not athletes.

So which is the best approach ? If asked to search for inventions for the concept by Adidas, I would use broad classes in both CPC and IPC (as the company has relatively few inventions). I would use the "In my patents list" ability (below the title in the bibliographic format) to list patent specifications by Adidas in the general field for later retrieval. I would also use the descriptions and the search reports at the end of European or World publications to see if they mentioned related material by Adidas.

I also searched the very broad A61B together with timepiece, watch and wristwatch (and their plurals) for Adidas and got zero hits (but beware their clever use of "portable electronic unit", which includes most watches).

It does seem that Adidas has not yet published the details -- hardly surprising, as it takes 18 months for a new specification to be published.

The patent for the Resusci Anne mannequin

The BBC news site yesterday published an article titled Rescusci Anne and l'Inconnue: the Mona Lisa of the Seine.

It was very interesting, and I can add that the invention of the resuscitation mannequin was patented by the same Norwegian toymaker named in the story. In 1961 Asmund Laerdal filed for a British patent with a lengthy title beginning Improvements in training dolls (phantoms). Below is a drawing from it showing the mouth area, which incorporates a valve so that air from previous users is not taken in by a fresh user.

Laerdal took out a further 8 British patents on the subject and 9 American patents in the health area. These lists do overlap.

The Le Corbusier chaise longue

Many architects have designed furniture. Presumably the idea is that having designed and hence controlled the exterior, they might as well do the same with the interior.

One of these is the Swiss architect Le Corbusier. He, with two others, applied for a French patent for his Chaise longue invention. Below is what it looks like.

It looks incredibly modern, yet dates back to 1929. The base is independent of the recliner, with curved tubular steel runners enabling the chair's position to be easily modified. It is still in production, and has become a design classic as it looks fantastic as well as carrying out its function. "Form follows function".

The three inventors are named on the patent as Le Corbusier, his cousin Pierre Jeanneret, and Charlotte Perriand. She was a designer who had asked to join Le Corbusier's Paris studio. He rejected her, saying that they did not embroider cushions. A few months later he had to apologise when he asked her to join him to head his furniture activities, as the same cousin had shown him a bar made of aluminium, glass and chrome at an exhibition. Perriand had renovated her apartment with that design and had then recreated it.

I must admit that I had never heard of the chair or of Perriand, but we had an example of the chair delivered to our new flat yesterday. It is very comfortable and looks elegant in its mock calfskin (the early models are available in canvas of calfskin). Here it is in our living room.

The Gtech cordless vacuum cleaner

I've been meaning to write before about Nick Grey's Gtech cordless vacuum cleaner.

Dyson has been making vacuum cleaners which are emptied from their bin for many years. Grey's vacuum cleaner claims to be an advance.

There are two small compartments which are in the cleaner head, just 5 cm from the surface being cleaned. The dust and debris is compressed in bales which can easily be removed. This means a 95% electrical saving: the motor is just 100 watts, compared to 1400 to 2400 for conventional vacuum cleaners. 

In addition, it is cordless. After a four hour charge it can operate for 40 minutes. Again, cords are certainly a nuisance and potentially a hazard.

It is also light -- the AirRam model weights 3.5 kg, half the typical rival model.

Nicholas Gerald Grey, his name in the patents, is from Worcestershire and states he is a mechanical engineer in company records. As a boy he was always tinkering with things. He was head of product development for another vacuum cleaner company but left with enough savings to last him for 18 months and set up his own company in 2001, believing that he could make something better -- light, energy efficient, cordless, and easy to use. The company is Grey Technology but somewhat confusingly uses Gtech on the site.

Many millions of units have been sold by his company Grey Technology, with models changing in appearance, with US shopping channels being the first advertising push. A short video by the company certainly makes it look very interesting. The company makes other cordless devices, over 22 million units so far.

This is a list of the fifteen World patent applications in the name of Nicholas Gerald Grey.

He does seem to have modified his ideas. Below is a model from 2006 for the cleaner head, as shown in among others EP1810603. 

The current model, the Gtech AirRam, has a squarish head, similar in appearance to (but not necessarily identical to) that shown below, which is from his Surface cleaning apparatus patent application.

It is interesting that the UK has, along with Dyson, another growing company which has made a leap forward in vacuum cleaner design.

Sensors in clothing

The Daily Telegraph published an article today with the title UK researchers win patent for wearable smart sensors. It sounds like a nice idea, from Liverpool John Moores University. I have for a long time thought that wearing sensors is going to be an important advance in telemedicine. There are just two things wrong with the article.

The first is that there is no mention of the patent document's number, or a link to it, to help those interested in learning more. Nobody would write a review of a book or film without mentioning the title, after all.

The second is that the university hasn't actually got a patent. All that has happened is that a patent application was published on the 11 September as Microwave monitoring using an electrically conductive textile. Granting a patent is a second stage. Maybe the usage by the UK Intellectual Property Office calling it a "milestone patent" confused the issue in their press release on the invention.

The invention provides continual monitoring of the body using non-invasive techniques. This area is so important that the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) has provided an area for classifying diagnostic sensors mounted on clothing at A61B/6804. Patent documents on that subject can be found by ticking the box next to the required classification and then on Find Patents (on the left). This gives nearly 3,000 hits.

Better, perhaps, is to click on Copy to Search Form when additional fields can be added, such as keywords, company names, or patent authorities to narrow down the hits found. A problem with the CPC is that often the classes are added many months after publication, while the less detailed International Patent Classification on which it is based is available on publication day.

In this particular publication, very unusually, the CPC is already available, perhaps to mark the fact that the publication is GB2500000 in a series that began with 2000001 in 1978.

Subject searching in a sophisticated way is complicated and it is easy to make mistakes, so I always recommend using experts to help, such as the librarians in the Patlib UK network.

Happy birthday, lava lamp

The BBC has a story on the 50th anniversary of the famous lava lamp. It is called Lava lamp creators mark 50 years of 1960s icon.The 50 refers to the 1963 date of setting up the original company.

I enjoyed it, and am providing links here to the two key patents.

In 1964 Crestworth Limited applied for what was published as the patent called Display device. Below is the main drawing.

However, there were four problems with this first model. This was explained in a second patent, filed in 1967 by Edward Walker, the former RAF officer who thought up the idea in the first place.

This was also called Display device. The first problem was that as it took a long time for the device to become ready when switched on, "It has now been found that some viewers may become impatient during the preliminary heating up period." The second was that if left on for a long time, overheating caused the globules to break up into "unattractive tiny droplets". The third was that the apparatus could freeze and therefore break in cold periods. The fourth was that draughts could cause problems, requiring careful positioning of the lamp.

All these problems were solved by adding something to the fluid. A "water-miscible liquid.".

Anti-freeze, in other words.

The Blaze Light for bicycles

The James Dyson Awards will be announced on the 12 September (national winners) with the shortlist on the 10 October.

One of the applicants is the Blaze Light for bicycles. It is a lighting innovation for cyclists. During my career at the British Library I met numerous inventors who had ideas related to bicycles. Many were for promoting safety at night, usually either enhancing visibility or for indicating turns, and I quickly realised that there was lots of prior art out there. I remember, shortly before I retired, two very secretive inventors who insisted that I sign a non-disclosure agreement, only for me than to explain that their idea was very well known. They had spent six months developing the idea without spending half an hour doing even a simple look through the patents.

The inventor is Emily Brooke of Bath, Somerset. Her Light projection safety device for a two wheeled vehicle was granted a British patent in April 2013. The main drawing is shown below.









An image of a bicycle is projected in front of the cyclist by an LED. The idea is
that heavy vehicle drivers, in particular, are more likely to notice the cyclist.

The video on the Dyson website starts by welcoming Kickstarter, the
crowdfunding site, and with that hint I found that the project had been funded with
£55,000 by 782 backers. More power to crowdfunding ! I wish the concept had
started sooner as good ideas find it much easier to get funding than with banks or
venture capitalists.

According to the British patent, Brooke acted as her own patent attorney. I would
not advise that, as it is so easy to get things wrong. The claims on the final page, I would suggest, are unhelpfully restrictive ("broad yet precise", was what a patent attorney once said to me was the ideal).
The Patlib libraries can be asked for free and helpful advice for innovative businesses and inventors.

Apple's watch invention

The TechCrunch website has just announced that Apple has had a US patent granted for a disappearing bezel for an electronic watch to enable a bigger screen to be visible. Published today, it's US 8447114.

The problem with putting screens on tiny devices is that it's hard to see anything. Any ability to enlarge the screen is highly beneficial for the user -- and for those who wish to communicate with them.

But what do you call it ? In December 2012 Apple applied for the Taiwan trade mark iWatch in Class 9, which includes software, as quoted in an article on the MacRumors website.

If they want a US trade mark for that trade mark, the problem is that in August 2012 OMG Electronics applied for that trade mark with 85703706 in Class 9 -- but failed, inexplicably, to say it was for watches as well as various listed devices.

Earlier still, in July 2007 Platinum International Holdings applied for 77236688 for iWatch, again in Class 9, but mentioned "cell phones watch". This has not yet been registered, which is odd after six years.

This could be important, as listing goods is sometimes vital when the identical trade mark co-exists in the same class, on the grounds that they can't be confused. The earliest company to file gets the trade mark. You can quote a "priority", when you first filed it within 6 months in another country, to get an earlier filing date.

Forbes Magazine has an article on the subject which cites the Taiwan data.

The Google Glass patents

I t's been fun having a look for the patents associated with Google Glass, the spectacles that enable its wearers to interact with the Web and, above all, to see projections of information.

Google Glass itself is the subject of a US trade mark application which, oddly enough, was published 18 June 2013 for opposition -- several weeks in the future, as I write.

The key term seems to be "wearable" although it is possible that some new technology involved does not depend on a wearable frame and therefore may be hard to find.

There are seven US Design patents for the look of variant models, all with the title "Wearable display device" (although one adds the word "frame", and one "section").

An article on the CNET website, published 21 February, suggests that US20130044042A, is highly relevant. The article is called Google Glass patent application gets really technical. I prefer to link to the corresponding World patent application, Wearable device with input and output structures. One of its drawings is given below.

However, three other patent applications were published in March or April and there are in all eight World patent applications by Google containing the word "Wearable".

None of these have been granted rights as B documents. One advantage of using the World documents rather than the corresponding US applications (listed here) is that search reports listing prior art found by patent office officials is often available.

These are either on A1 documents (at the end) or in separate A3 documents. The USA only publishes search reports on its granted patents, where a brief summary is given on the front page.

[24 May -- the New Yorker website has an interesting article on forerunners, Glass before Google, which links to a copy of a patent by Morton Heilig, applied for in 1957]

[7 Dec -- see my article Google surging ahead with patenting for update on wearable technology]