How does the MPEP address computer-implemented means-plus-function limitations?

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based)BlueIron Update: 2024-09-29

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

The MPEP provides specific guidance for computer-implemented means-plus-function limitations, particularly regarding the written description requirement. According to MPEP 2185:

“If the means- (or step-) plus-function limitation is computer-implemented, and the specification does not provide a disclosure of the computer and algorithm in sufficient detail to demonstrate to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor possessed the invention, see MPEP § 2161.01 and MPEP § 2181, subsection IV, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, for lack of written description must be made.”

This guidance emphasizes the importance of providing a detailed disclosure of both the computer and the algorithm used to perform the claimed function. Failure to do so may result in a rejection for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).

Topics: First Or Second Paragraphs MPEP 2100 - Patentability MPEP 2185 - Related Issues Under 35 U.S.C. 112(A) Or (B) And Pre - Aia 35 U.S.C. 112 Patent Law Patent Procedure
Tags: Aia Practice, antecedent basis, Enablement Standard