How Many Tigers are there in the World?
July 17, 2025
“How many tigers are there in the world?” my seven-year-old daughter asks me over breakfast. Upon relaying the question to my favorite search engine, it confidently responds with, “There are an estimated 5,574 wild tigers remaining in the world.” This seems like concrete information that we can both bank on. But I know that if I tell this to her before we launch off on a hike, it’s likely that she will unlace her boots and refuse to budge. Maybe I should remind her that we live in the Pacific Northwest…and she should have asked about the bears.
The point being that we have no shortage of answers, but the right questions sometimes elude us. I assume that we all run into this professionally, and I have made a habit of asking subject matter experts (e.g., the person fixing my AC) “what is a question that I should be asking you?”
Questions that clients often ask themselves before reaching out to us include “will I be able to get a patent for my invention” or “Is our brand eligible for trademark protection?” I will talk to the first, and rope in my colleague to speak to the latter.
Will I be able to get a patent for my invention?
An inventor wanting to know if they will be able to get a patent for their invention naturally turns to the internet to begin a DIY prior art search. They may have an invention that has features A, B, and C, and so they launch off into searching for A, B, and C.
To their delight, they find no webpages, no patent publications, no mention of the ABC. Their LLM of choice gives them an electromagnetic pat on the back, and the inventor is ready to move full steam ahead in procuring a patent.
Unfortunately, while an examiner at the US Patent Office will certainly look for a prior art description that includes A, B, and C, they will also likely begin a process of cobbling each of these elements to craft an Obviousness-type rejection. For instance, they may grab an ‘A’ from a first reference and find ‘B’ and ‘C’ in another reference. Or the examiner might find each of A, B, and C in separate references and argue that the combination is obvious. Or, the examiner might find A, and C in separate references, and propose that B is common knowledge. With any of these combinations, the examiner may reject the claims to the client’s ABC invention.
What I propose is that a seasoned expert can provide clients with appropriate questions and analysis in these situations. Questions such as, how likely is it that an examiner would decide to combine these references? If they do combine them, what is our strategy? What can we build into the patent specification now to give us a strong position in anticipation of such a rejection?
These questions go on and on, and while a search engine or LLM will answer them just fine, it remains more difficult to get a satisfactory answer to “what questions should I be asking?”
The same holds true for securing a trademark. My colleague, Nicole, points out that it’s not just about whether a name is “taken” - it’s about asking smarter questions, like how the name functions in the marketplace, what risks exist based on similar marks, and how to position your brand for long-term protection.
Is our brand eligible for trademark protection?
Just as an inventor might fixate on the uniqueness of their invention’s features - proudly noting that no one else seems to have combined A, B, and C - business owners often zero in on whether their exact trademark is already in use. If a quick online search or a DIY database check doesn’t reveal an identical business name, it can feel like a green light to move forward.
But just as a patent examiner can piece together multiple references to reject a patent application on the grounds of obviousness, a trademark examiner - or a competing brand - can raise issues based on marks that are similar, not identical. And similarity, it isn't just about matching words. It’s about how a mark sounds when spoken, how it looks in print or design, and the overall commercial impression it creates in a consumer’s mind.
Two marks can be spelled differently yet pronounced the same. They can use different words but convey a similar meaning. They might serve similar audiences or exist in overlapping industries, even if the owners never intended confusion. That’s where legal nuance enters - and where strategic foresight matters most.
Beyond potential confusion, trademark protection hinges on other critical factors, like whether a name is distinctive enough to even qualify for protection. Is the brand name merely descriptive? Is it generic? Or is it strong enough to stand on its own and deter copycats in the marketplace?
That’s why building a smart legal foundation (whether for an invention or a brand) isn’t just about finding clear answers. It’s about asking sharper questions. Questions that uncover risk, reveal opportunity, and help shape a more resilient business.
The right questions matter
Whether you’re preparing a patent application or laying claim to a trademark, working with someone who knows how to spot the right questions and build a legal strategy around them can mean the difference between a strong application and one that’s dead on arrival. At MLO, we won’t just tell you about the tigers— we will suggest that you ask about the bears. Contact us to get started.