Mechanical Engineers and Protecting IP
Mechanical Engineers and Protecting IP
Understanding when innovation is patentable and how missteps can erase protection is essential knowledge for today’s mechanical engineers.
Mechanical engineers are often at the center of innovation, even if they may not realize it. In the process of solving complex problems and refining designs, many engineers overlook a critical aspect of their work: protecting the intellectual property (IP) created in the process.
According to Tony Laurentano, an IP attorney with the law firm Nelson Mullins, the most pressing challenge for most engineers is knowing when they have something worth protecting.
“Engineers don’t always recognize when the work they do is innovative enough to be patentable,” said Laurentano, whose patent work is almost exclusively with engineers who are “generally hard-wired to be humble.”
He explained that engineers “think that if they can figure something out, anyone can. An engineer could have a stroke of genius and develop a design, a process, or device that’s incredibly creative or unique. But because they solve complex problems every day, it just feels routine to them.”
This disconnect can leave unique ideas and inventions unprotected. It can also expose companies to competitive risks and in some cases even jeopardize a valuable patent before the application is filed.
Mechanical engineering tends to evolve through incremental improvements: a more efficient heat exchanger, a new fastening approach, a modified fluid-handling component. Because these changes often feel small, engineers may assume that these modifications or adjustments are not patentable.
But patentability rests on three criteria:
1. Is it new?
2. Is it useful?
3. Is it non-obvious?
Novelty and usefulness are straightforward. The real hurdle is non-obviousness, which essentially involves determining whether a person skilled in the field would naturally make the same improvement without inventive insight.
Laurentano said this “delta of innovation” is where many engineers misjudge their own work. “I’ve had clients bring me something they thought was too obvious to protect, and it turned out to be quite significant. And I’ve seen the reverse,” he said.
In the latter case, engineers may believe they have created something entirely new, only to discover that their work doesn’t meet the necessary criteria. Patent examiners evaluate inventions against prior art, which is the collection of existing patents, publications, products, and public disclosures that establish what is already known in a given field.
If an invention is too similar to this established body of work, it may be deemed obvious, even if the engineer arrived at the solution independently.
Given this dynamic, it is critical for mechanical engineers—both at the individual and corporate levels—to understand the competitive landscape. Even a small improvement can be non-obvious if it solves a long-standing technical problem or combines known elements in a new way.
Even if an invention is patentable, engineers often inadvertently lose the ability to protect it. The most common reason? Disclosing the invention publicly before filing.
In the United States, once an invention is published, demonstrated, presented, posted online, or offered for sale, a one-year countdown begins. If engineers or their companies don’t file within this one-year window, the invention becomes unpatentable.
“One of the first things I’ll ask is whether the invention is already being marketed or sold,” Laurentano said. “And sometimes the answer is, ‘Yes, we started selling it three years ago.’ At that point, there’s no patent protection left to pursue.”
Timing becomes even more consequential when international protection is considered. Unlike the United States, many countries do not provide a grace period following public disclosure. This means that once an invention is revealed publicly, patent rights may be forfeited immediately outside the U.S. For companies operating in global markets, early disclosure can quietly eliminate international patent options before they are ever considered.
So it is important to know that:
• Discussing innovations publicly without safeguards can forfeit rights.
• Sharing too much during customer demos or sales pitches can be risky.
• Publishing academic work before filing a patent can eliminate protection entirely.
For younger engineers especially, the takeaway is simple: When in doubt, ask before you disclose.
Jerry Guerra is an independent writer in Lynnfield, Mass.
This is part one of a two-part article. Part two covers IP protection tools, patent ownership, why patents matter, and more.
According to Tony Laurentano, an IP attorney with the law firm Nelson Mullins, the most pressing challenge for most engineers is knowing when they have something worth protecting.
Knowing innovation is patent-worthy
“Engineers don’t always recognize when the work they do is innovative enough to be patentable,” said Laurentano, whose patent work is almost exclusively with engineers who are “generally hard-wired to be humble.”
He explained that engineers “think that if they can figure something out, anyone can. An engineer could have a stroke of genius and develop a design, a process, or device that’s incredibly creative or unique. But because they solve complex problems every day, it just feels routine to them.”
This disconnect can leave unique ideas and inventions unprotected. It can also expose companies to competitive risks and in some cases even jeopardize a valuable patent before the application is filed.
Mechanical engineering tends to evolve through incremental improvements: a more efficient heat exchanger, a new fastening approach, a modified fluid-handling component. Because these changes often feel small, engineers may assume that these modifications or adjustments are not patentable.
But patentability rests on three criteria:
1. Is it new?
2. Is it useful?
3. Is it non-obvious?
Novelty and usefulness are straightforward. The real hurdle is non-obviousness, which essentially involves determining whether a person skilled in the field would naturally make the same improvement without inventive insight.
Laurentano said this “delta of innovation” is where many engineers misjudge their own work. “I’ve had clients bring me something they thought was too obvious to protect, and it turned out to be quite significant. And I’ve seen the reverse,” he said.
In the latter case, engineers may believe they have created something entirely new, only to discover that their work doesn’t meet the necessary criteria. Patent examiners evaluate inventions against prior art, which is the collection of existing patents, publications, products, and public disclosures that establish what is already known in a given field.
If an invention is too similar to this established body of work, it may be deemed obvious, even if the engineer arrived at the solution independently.
Given this dynamic, it is critical for mechanical engineers—both at the individual and corporate levels—to understand the competitive landscape. Even a small improvement can be non-obvious if it solves a long-standing technical problem or combines known elements in a new way.
The one-year rule
Even if an invention is patentable, engineers often inadvertently lose the ability to protect it. The most common reason? Disclosing the invention publicly before filing.
In the United States, once an invention is published, demonstrated, presented, posted online, or offered for sale, a one-year countdown begins. If engineers or their companies don’t file within this one-year window, the invention becomes unpatentable.
ESOPs Make Mechanical Engineers Stakeholders
ESOP offers engineers and the firms they work for adaptability in an ever-changing world as it rewards professionalism, hard work, and loyalty.
Timing becomes even more consequential when international protection is considered. Unlike the United States, many countries do not provide a grace period following public disclosure. This means that once an invention is revealed publicly, patent rights may be forfeited immediately outside the U.S. For companies operating in global markets, early disclosure can quietly eliminate international patent options before they are ever considered.
So it is important to know that:
• Discussing innovations publicly without safeguards can forfeit rights.
• Sharing too much during customer demos or sales pitches can be risky.
• Publishing academic work before filing a patent can eliminate protection entirely.
For younger engineers especially, the takeaway is simple: When in doubt, ask before you disclose.
Jerry Guerra is an independent writer in Lynnfield, Mass.
This is part one of a two-part article. Part two covers IP protection tools, patent ownership, why patents matter, and more.
Learning is a lifelong journey. Explore our growing collection of free learning resources and articles.