How are other transitional phrases like “having” interpreted in patent claims?
The interpretation of other transitional phrases like “having” in patent claims depends on the context and the specification. The MPEP states, Transitional phrases such as “having” must be interpreted in light of the specification to determine whether open or closed claim language is intended. This means that unlike the more standardized phrases like “comprising” or…
Read MoreHow does “having” function as a transitional phrase in patent claims?
How does “having” function as a transitional phrase in patent claims? The transitional phrase “having” in patent claims can function in different ways depending on the context: Open-ended transition: “Having” is generally interpreted as an open-ended transition, similar to “comprising,” unless the specification or other circumstances suggest otherwise. Closed transition: In some cases, “having” can…
Read MoreHow does the term “having” function as a transitional phrase in patent claims?
The term “having” can function as a transitional phrase in patent claims, but its interpretation depends on the context. According to MPEP 2111.03: “The transitional phrase “having” must be interpreted in light of the specification to determine whether open or closed claim language is intended.” In some cases, “having” can be interpreted as open-ended, similar…
Read More