What is the “rule of reason” in patent claim multiplicity?
The “rule of reason” in patent claim multiplicity refers to the principle that examiners should use judgment and consider the specific circumstances of each case when evaluating whether claims are unduly multiplied. This concept is derived from case law, as cited in MPEP 2173.05(n):
“As noted by the court in In re Chandler, 319 F.2d 211, 225, 138 USPQ 138, 148 (CCPA 1963), ‘applicants should be allowed reasonable latitude in stating their claims in regard to number and phraseology employed. The right of applicants to freedom of choice in selecting phraseology which truly points out and defines their inventions should not be abridged. Such latitude, however, should not be extended to sanction that degree of repetition and multiplicity which beclouds definition in a maze of confusion. The rule of reason should be practiced and applied on the basis of the relevant facts and circumstances in each individual case.'”
This rule emphasizes balancing the applicant’s right to fully describe their invention with the need for clear and concise claims. Examiners are expected to consider factors such as the nature and scope of the invention, the complexity of the technology, and the overall clarity of the application when applying this rule.
To learn more: