What are the issues with using phrases like “for example,” “such as,” or “or the like” in patent claims?

The MPEP addresses the use of phrases like “for example,” “such as,” or “or the like” in patent claims through specific form paragraphs. These phrases can render claims indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. 1. For the phrase “for example,” form paragraph 7.34.08 states: Regarding claim [1], the phrase…

Read More

How can inconsistencies between claims affect their validity?

Inconsistencies between claims can significantly affect their validity by rendering the scope of the claims uncertain. The MPEP 2173.03 addresses this issue: “In addition, inconsistencies in the meaning of terms or phrases between claims may render the scope of the claims to be uncertain.” This principle is illustrated in recent case law. For example, in…

Read More

How are amendments handled in inter partes reexamination proceedings?

Amendments in inter partes reexamination proceedings are handled as follows: Amendments should be submitted in proper form If appropriate, amendments will be entered for the reexamination proceeding, even if they don’t have legal effect until the certificate is issued “New matter” amendments to the disclosure will be required to be canceled Claims containing new matter…

Read More

What is the significance of the genus-species relationship in patent claims?

What is the significance of the genus-species relationship in patent claims? The genus-species relationship is crucial in patent claims, particularly when considering changes to the scope of claims. According to MPEP 2163.05, “[t]he written description requirement for a claimed genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species.” The MPEP provides…

Read More

What is the significance of “Full Scope Enablement” in patent law?

What is the significance of “Full Scope Enablement” in patent law? “Full Scope Enablement” is a crucial concept in patent law that ensures the inventor has provided sufficient information to enable the entire scope of the claimed invention. According to MPEP 2164.08: “All questions of enablement are evaluated against the claimed subject matter. The focus…

Read More