Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (2)
What are “narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim?
“Narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim refer to situations where a patent claim includes both a specific value or narrow range and a broader range that encompasses the narrow range. The MPEP 2173.05(c) addresses this issue:
“A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.”
For example, a claim might state “a length of 5 to 25 centimeters, preferably 15 to 20 centimeters.” This practice can lead to indefiniteness because:
- It’s unclear which range is actually being claimed
- The word “preferably” doesn’t clearly define the claim scope
- It may create uncertainty about the intended protection
Examiners must carefully evaluate such claims to ensure they meet the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
To learn more:
Using a trademark as a generic term in a patent claim can have significant negative consequences:
- It may render the claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
- It constitutes improper use of the trademark.
- It can potentially lead to the loss of trademark rights.
The MPEP 2173.05(u) states:
“In fact, the value of a trademark would be lost to the extent that it became the generic name of a product, rather than used as an identification of a source or origin of a product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name.”
This guidance emphasizes the importance of avoiding the use of trademarks as generic terms in patent claims to maintain both claim clarity and trademark protection.
To learn more:
MPEP 2173.05(C) – Numerical Ranges And Amounts Limitations (1)
What are “narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim?
“Narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim refer to situations where a patent claim includes both a specific value or narrow range and a broader range that encompasses the narrow range. The MPEP 2173.05(c) addresses this issue:
“A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.”
For example, a claim might state “a length of 5 to 25 centimeters, preferably 15 to 20 centimeters.” This practice can lead to indefiniteness because:
- It’s unclear which range is actually being claimed
- The word “preferably” doesn’t clearly define the claim scope
- It may create uncertainty about the intended protection
Examiners must carefully evaluate such claims to ensure they meet the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
To learn more:
MPEP 2173.05(U) – Trademarks Or Trade Names In A Claim (1)
Using a trademark as a generic term in a patent claim can have significant negative consequences:
- It may render the claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
- It constitutes improper use of the trademark.
- It can potentially lead to the loss of trademark rights.
The MPEP 2173.05(u) states:
“In fact, the value of a trademark would be lost to the extent that it became the generic name of a product, rather than used as an identification of a source or origin of a product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name.”
This guidance emphasizes the importance of avoiding the use of trademarks as generic terms in patent claims to maintain both claim clarity and trademark protection.
To learn more:
Patent Law (2)
What are “narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim?
“Narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim refer to situations where a patent claim includes both a specific value or narrow range and a broader range that encompasses the narrow range. The MPEP 2173.05(c) addresses this issue:
“A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.”
For example, a claim might state “a length of 5 to 25 centimeters, preferably 15 to 20 centimeters.” This practice can lead to indefiniteness because:
- It’s unclear which range is actually being claimed
- The word “preferably” doesn’t clearly define the claim scope
- It may create uncertainty about the intended protection
Examiners must carefully evaluate such claims to ensure they meet the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
To learn more:
Using a trademark as a generic term in a patent claim can have significant negative consequences:
- It may render the claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
- It constitutes improper use of the trademark.
- It can potentially lead to the loss of trademark rights.
The MPEP 2173.05(u) states:
“In fact, the value of a trademark would be lost to the extent that it became the generic name of a product, rather than used as an identification of a source or origin of a product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name.”
This guidance emphasizes the importance of avoiding the use of trademarks as generic terms in patent claims to maintain both claim clarity and trademark protection.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (2)
What are “narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim?
“Narrow and broader ranges” in the same claim refer to situations where a patent claim includes both a specific value or narrow range and a broader range that encompasses the narrow range. The MPEP 2173.05(c) addresses this issue:
“A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.”
For example, a claim might state “a length of 5 to 25 centimeters, preferably 15 to 20 centimeters.” This practice can lead to indefiniteness because:
- It’s unclear which range is actually being claimed
- The word “preferably” doesn’t clearly define the claim scope
- It may create uncertainty about the intended protection
Examiners must carefully evaluate such claims to ensure they meet the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
To learn more:
Using a trademark as a generic term in a patent claim can have significant negative consequences:
- It may render the claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
- It constitutes improper use of the trademark.
- It can potentially lead to the loss of trademark rights.
The MPEP 2173.05(u) states:
“In fact, the value of a trademark would be lost to the extent that it became the generic name of a product, rather than used as an identification of a source or origin of a product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name.”
This guidance emphasizes the importance of avoiding the use of trademarks as generic terms in patent claims to maintain both claim clarity and trademark protection.
To learn more: