How does “having” function as a transitional phrase in patent claims?

How does “having” function as a transitional phrase in patent claims?

The transitional phrase “having” in patent claims can function in different ways depending on the context:

• Open-ended transition: “Having” is generally interpreted as an open-ended transition, similar to “comprising,” unless the specification or other circumstances suggest otherwise.
• Closed transition: In some cases, “having” can be interpreted as a closed transition, similar to “consisting of,” if the intrinsic evidence clearly indicates that intent.

According to MPEP 2111.03:

“Transitional phrases such as ‘having’ must be interpreted in light of the specification to determine whether open or closed claim language is intended.“

When interpreting claims with “having” as a transitional phrase, examiners and practitioners should carefully consider the specification and prosecution history to determine the intended scope.

To learn more:

• transitional phrases
• having
• open-ended
• closed transition
• claim interpretation