What rejections should be considered for unsupported means-plus-function limitations?
When a means- (or step-) plus-function limitation in a claim is not supported by corresponding structure, material, or acts in the specification, the examiner should consider the following rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112: Enablement (35 U.S.C. 112(a)): If the skilled artisan would not know how to make and use the invention without a description of…
Read MoreWhat are the requirements for examining claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 with means-plus-function limitations?
When examining claims with means-plus-function limitations under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 35 U.S.C. 103, examiners must consider both the claimed subject matter and the means or step that performs the specified function. The MPEP 2185 states: “When examining the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 a determination of whether the prior art anticipates or…
Read MoreHow does the MPEP address computer-implemented means-plus-function limitations?
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…
Read MoreWhat are the key considerations for computer-implemented inventions under 35 U.S.C. 112?
For computer-implemented inventions, there are several key considerations under 35 U.S.C. 112, particularly regarding written description and enablement requirements. The MPEP 2185 highlights: “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…
Read MoreHow does the use of block diagrams in a patent application affect the enablement requirement?
The use of block diagrams in a patent application can be sufficient to meet the enablement requirement under certain conditions. According to MPEP 2185: “Note that the description of an apparatus with block diagrams describing the function, but not the structure, of the apparatus is not fatal under the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a)…
Read MoreHow does 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interact with other requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112?
While 35 U.S.C. 112(f) permits a particular form of claim limitation, it does not create exceptions to other requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112. The MPEP states: “While 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, permits a particular form of claim limitation, it cannot be read as creating an exception either to the…
Read More