Gary ...

<<If you're fairly comfortable with electronic searching, use of one of the available public databases (actually, they're all available to the public -- none limited to patent professionals, although some charge fees) should give you a good idea of what's out there. >>

And those would be?? Still my question isn't answered. Can I conduct this search on my own, accessing the same information or is it WORTH IT to pay a PA to do it?

<<For a more comprehensive and (usually) reliable view, paying a professional a couple of thousand dollars for a good search may give you greater confidence before spending $10K-$50K trying to get a patent out of the US Patent Office >

Not to be brash, honestly, I've never dealt with lawyers/ attorneys (besides one of my good friends ex husband, who seemed to be pretty cool, until the divorce) but, are you kidding me? A couple thou? Zoomlegal.com will do a "prior art" search for around $300 and a quote from a PA in my area was $600. As far as I know, they're relatively reputable.

My perspective is to find the cheapest route to determining whether or not my idea has a) been patented before and << (if, in fact, your technology is patentable). >> b) is patentable.

The whole idea of paying a minimum of $3500 to apply for a patent that may be denied is ridiculous to me. What the hell does "obvious" mean anyway? How can I determine whether or not my innovation is "obvious"? Obvious to who? Whose opinion is that based on? Isn't that the reason for most objections?

On the flip side, thanks for the following info:
<< As a side note, you need not list "every patent you look at" on your IDS (Information Disclosure Statement -- a document you give to the US patent office during prosecution) -- you only need to disclose MATERIAL prior art of which you're aware. Patent examiners neither want to see nor need to see everything you find -- especially the irrelevant stuff. >>

Not wanting to sound like a crazy inventor but my innovation is simple ... and can be mass marketed ... and meets a ton of the criteria. I just don't know if it's too "obvious" or not. Perhaps it's been submitted and rejected. Can I find that out? Perhaps that would be more valuable.

Thanks for your advice. Both of you. It's much appreciated!
b

Gary, my error. I do have clients who ask for the list of virtually everything we look at, but it doesn't all go on the IDS>

>>As a side note, you need not list "every patent you look at" on your IDS (Information Disclosure Statement -- a document you give to the US patent office during prosecution) -- you only need to disclose MATERIAL prior art of which you're aware. Patent examiners neither want to see nor need to see everything you find -- especially the irrelevant stuff.<<

To clarify, if you (entity drafting the patent application) is aware of any prior art that's *relevant* the invention, you should list it in an IDS. It's often difficult to determine what's relevant, but my understanding is that one should err on the side of caution and list anything that may be remotely relevant.