Home About Us Services Awards Team Insights Career Contact Us TÜRKÇEENGLISH Devin Patent — Istanbul

Devin Patent · Service Areas

Our Services

Eight service areas covering the full life of an industrial property right: searches and filing strategy, prosecution before TÜRKPATENT, international registration through Madrid, the PCT, the Hague System and EUIPO, watch and renewal programmes, recordals, domain names and geographical indications.

Court proceedings and advisory work: Devin Law & IP →

02Patents & Utility ModelsA patent is only as strong as its claims. What the claim covers decides whether a competitor can design around it, whether the office grants it, and whether it survives a later challenge.

Patents & Utility Models

A patent is only as strong as its claims. What the claim covers decides whether a competitor can design around it, whether the office grants it, and whether it survives a later challenge. We prepare prior art searches, draft specifications and manage prosecution before TÜRKPATENT, the EPO and under the PCT together with patent attorneys and, on the European route, European patent attorneys — with a team that reads the granted claim the way an opposing party will read it.

Before anything is drafted we establish what is already known. A prior art search covers patent databases, published applications, technical literature and the applicant's own earlier disclosures, because a public presentation or a catalogue can destroy novelty as effectively as a granted patent. The result is an opinion on novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability, and a frank view on whether the invention should be filed as a patent, as a utility model, or not at all.

Claim drafting is where commercial intention becomes the actual scope of protection. A claim written too narrowly protects a single embodiment while competitors work around it; written too broadly it invites objections over the prior art and collapses at the first serious challenge. We build the independent claim around the technical contribution that matters commercially, support it with dependent claims that provide fallback positions, and write a specification detailed enough to sustain amendments later without adding new matter.

Search and examination reports are answered with technical reasoning rather than concession. Each cited document is read for what it genuinely discloses to the skilled person on its filing date, and amendments are proposed only where they preserve the commercially useful scope. The same discipline applies across routes: national examination before TÜRKPATENT, the international phase under the PCT with its national entries, and European applications before the EPO, where the choices made early determine the cost of the whole family.

After grant the file still needs attention. Annuities fall due every year and a single missed payment can end the right; post-grant opposition must be answered within a short window; and employee invention procedures under Industrial Property Code no. 6769 carry notification periods and compensation rules that are easy to breach unnoticed. Where a dispute reaches the courts, invalidity actions, infringement claims and damages are conducted by Devin Law & IP at devinlaw.com.tr, with the technical file we have kept.

What is decided at this stage cannot easily be repaired afterwards. The prior art defines the space that is still free, the claim defines how much of that space the applicant takes, and the route defines where the right will exist and what it will cost. We settle all three together, with the inventors in the room and the commercial target stated plainly.

Prior Art Searches
  • Novelty searches across patent databases and published applications worldwide
  • Technical literature, standards and product documentation reviewed alongside patent records
  • Freedom to operate assessments before a new product line is launched
  • The applicant's own earlier disclosures checked before the filing date
  • Written opinion on novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability
  • Comparison of the invention with the closest documents that were found
  • Advice on whether a patent or a utility model fits better
Claim & Specification Drafting
  • Independent claims built around the technical contribution with commercial value
  • Dependent claims arranged as fallback positions for later amendment
  • Description written to support amendments without adding any new matter
  • Drawings and embodiments prepared with the examiner and the competitor in mind
  • Abstract, summary and technical field aligned with the claimed scope
  • Terminology defined so ambiguity cannot be used against the applicant
  • Draft reviewed with the inventors before anything is filed
Filing Route Selection
  • National, PCT, European and direct foreign routes compared on cost
  • Priority year planned so decisions fall when the information is available
  • Utility model considered where speed matters more than examination depth
  • Target markets, manufacturing locations and competitors mapped before the route is fixed
  • Divisional strategy prepared for inventions with several distinct technical aspects
  • Confidentiality and disclosure timing managed around fairs and publications
  • Budget projected across the first ten years of the patent family
Disclosure before filingA conference paper, a trade fair stand or a product sold before the filing date can defeat the application later, even though it came from the applicant. We ask what has already been shown, and to whom, before any work on the text begins.
Inventive step is a judgementNovelty is usually a straightforward comparison; inventive step is not. It turns on what the skilled person would have found obvious by combining known documents, and the argument is won on the technical problem the invention actually solves.
Patent or utility modelA utility model is granted faster and costs less, but the protection is shorter and process inventions are outside it. Where the product life is short and the market is domestic, it can still be the better commercial choice.
Claims written for the businessThe right question is not how broad the claim can be, but what a competitor would have to avoid doing. We draft from the competitor's likely workaround backwards, so the granted claim blocks the route that actually matters.

Prosecution is a long conversation with several offices at once, conducted under deadlines that do not move. The value of the file is decided by what is conceded and what is defended in each response. We keep the claims aligned across routes, so a concession made in one office does not quietly undermine the same family somewhere else.

TÜRKPATENT Examination
  • Formal examination completed and deficiencies answered within the statutory periods
  • Search report received, analysed and discussed with the inventors before response
  • Written observations on the cited documents with reasoned technical arguments
  • Claim amendments proposed only where commercially useful scope is preserved
  • Third party observations answered during the publication period of the application
  • Utility model applications taken through the search and the examination stage
  • Grant formalities, fees and publication monitored through to completion
PCT & National Phase
  • International applications filed with priority correctly claimed and documented
  • International search and preliminary examination reports assessed for national strategy
  • National and regional phase entries planned country by country
  • Translations prepared with technical terminology checked against the original claims
  • Local agents instructed and their responses reviewed before any submission
  • Deadline control across the thirty month window and each national entry
  • Cost forecasts updated as countries are added to or dropped from the plan
European Patents
  • European applications filed and prosecuted before the EPO on the client's behalf
  • Communications answered with amendments supported by the original description
  • Oral proceedings prepared with the technical case set out in advance
  • Validation in selected states planned against the commercial footprint
  • Unitary effect and classical validation compared on cost and coverage
  • Translation requirements handled state by state after the patent is granted
  • Opposition periods monitored for the client and for competitor patents
Answer the document, not the objectionAn examiner cites a document for a reason. The response that works explains what that document actually teaches on its date and why the skilled person would not have reached the invention from it, rather than simply narrowing the claim to escape.
Amendments carry consequencesEvery narrowing amendment is read later by anyone attacking or interpreting the patent. We record why each change was made and keep the description broad enough that the position taken in one office can still be explained in another.
The thirty month decisionNational phase entry is the point where an international application turns into real cost. We narrow the country list against manufacturing sites, distribution channels and where competitors are actually present, rather than filing everywhere and abandoning later.
Watching competitor filingsPublished applications of competitors are read while they are still pending, when observations and later opposition are still possible. Acting at that stage is far cheaper than meeting a granted patent in the market, or in a court case handled by Devin Law & IP at devinlaw.com.tr.

A granted patent is a cost as well as an asset. Annuities run for twenty years, oppositions arrive with short deadlines, and inventions made by employees create obligations that begin the moment the invention is notified. We keep the calendar, watch what competitors obtain, and review the portfolio each year so the money is spent on rights that still earn it.

Annuities & Deadlines
  • Annuity calendar maintained for every application and every granted patent
  • Reminders sent well before the surcharge period begins to run
  • Payments made through local agents and confirmed to the client in writing
  • Restoration requests where a payment was missed for a justified reason
  • Portfolio reviewed annually so unused rights are not funded indefinitely
  • Deadlines for translations, validations and recordals tracked in one system
  • Status reports covering the whole family together with cost projections
Post-Grant Opposition
  • Oppositions filed against competitor patents within the statutory period
  • Grounds built on lack of novelty, inventive step or insufficient disclosure
  • Prior art collected from technical literature, use evidence and earlier filings
  • Responses to oppositions filed against the client's own granted patent
  • Auxiliary requests prepared so a fallback claim set is always available
  • Board decisions reviewed for their effect on the rest of the portfolio
  • Clear advice on when the administrative route has been exhausted
Employee Inventions
  • Notification and claim procedures under Industrial Property Code no. 6769
  • Deadlines calculated for the employer's response to an invention notice
  • Compensation calculated with the method and the criteria properly documented
  • Service invention and free invention distinguished on the actual facts
  • Internal regulations and forms prepared for research based companies
  • University and research institute inventions handled under their own regime
  • Assignment and inventor records kept consistent with the register entries
A missed annuity ends the rightRestoration is possible only in narrow circumstances and never guaranteed. Two independent reminders, one to the client and one internal, cost nothing next to the loss of a patent that took four years and considerable expense to obtain.
Insufficient disclosure as a groundA patent can fail not because the invention is old but because the description does not enable the skilled person to carry it out. This is decided by what was written on the filing date, which is why drafting and post-grant strength are the same subject.
Employee inventions have deadlinesThe obligations under Industrial Property Code no. 6769 start when the employee gives notice, and both the employer's response and the compensation follow fixed periods. Companies that keep no internal procedure usually discover the rules only when an inventor has left.
When the dispute leaves the officeInvalidity actions, infringement proceedings, preliminary injunctions and damages claims are court matters and are conducted by Devin Law & IP at devinlaw.com.tr. Our part is to hand over a prosecution history and a technical file that will stand up to that examination.

Insights on this area

PatentEmployee Inventions under Turkish Law: Who Owns the Invention, and What Is It Worth?28 August 2026PatentWhere the Claim Ends: Scope, Equivalents and What the File Says About You7 August 2026PatentUtility Model or Patent: What the Cheaper Right Actually Costs31 July 2026Unfair CompetitionMisleading Statements and Unfair Competition Based on Non-Finalized TÜRKPATENT Decisions14 February 2026