Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (1)
Referencing figures or tables in patent claims is generally discouraged, as claims should be complete in themselves. However, the MPEP 2173.05(s) states that it is permitted “only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim.“
The MPEP emphasizes that this is a “necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience.” This means that referencing figures or tables should be a last resort when it’s impossible to describe the invention adequately using words alone.
To learn more:
MPEP 2173.05(S) – Reference To Figures Or Tables (1)
Referencing figures or tables in patent claims is generally discouraged, as claims should be complete in themselves. However, the MPEP 2173.05(s) states that it is permitted “only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim.“
The MPEP emphasizes that this is a “necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience.” This means that referencing figures or tables should be a last resort when it’s impossible to describe the invention adequately using words alone.
To learn more:
Patent Law (2)
Referencing figures or tables in patent claims is generally discouraged, as claims should be complete in themselves. However, the MPEP 2173.05(s) states that it is permitted “only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim.“
The MPEP emphasizes that this is a “necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience.” This means that referencing figures or tables should be a last resort when it’s impossible to describe the invention adequately using words alone.
To learn more:
Can drawings or figures in a patent application introduce new matter?
Yes, drawings or figures can introduce new matter in a patent application. The MPEP 608.04 addresses this issue:
‘In establishing a disclosure, applicant may rely not only on the description and drawing as filed but also on the original claims if their content justifies it.’
This implies that:
- Original drawings are part of the disclosure and can support claims.
- However, new or amended drawings can potentially introduce new matter.
- Changes to drawings that go beyond what was originally disclosed may be rejected as new matter.
For example, adding specific structural details to a figure that weren’t originally disclosed, or introducing new relationships between components, could be considered new matter. Applicants should be cautious when modifying drawings and ensure any changes are fully supported by the original disclosure.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (2)
Referencing figures or tables in patent claims is generally discouraged, as claims should be complete in themselves. However, the MPEP 2173.05(s) states that it is permitted “only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim.“
The MPEP emphasizes that this is a “necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience.” This means that referencing figures or tables should be a last resort when it’s impossible to describe the invention adequately using words alone.
To learn more:
Can drawings or figures in a patent application introduce new matter?
Yes, drawings or figures can introduce new matter in a patent application. The MPEP 608.04 addresses this issue:
‘In establishing a disclosure, applicant may rely not only on the description and drawing as filed but also on the original claims if their content justifies it.’
This implies that:
- Original drawings are part of the disclosure and can support claims.
- However, new or amended drawings can potentially introduce new matter.
- Changes to drawings that go beyond what was originally disclosed may be rejected as new matter.
For example, adding specific structural details to a figure that weren’t originally disclosed, or introducing new relationships between components, could be considered new matter. Applicants should be cautious when modifying drawings and ensure any changes are fully supported by the original disclosure.
To learn more: