How are product-by-process claims treated in infringement cases?

The treatment of product-by-process claims in infringement cases differs from their treatment during patent examination. MPEP 2113 states: “The structure implied by the process steps should be considered when assessing the patentability of product-by-process claims over the prior art, especially where the product can only be defined by the process steps by which the product…

Read More

What makes a claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)?

A claim can be considered indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) if it creates confusion about when direct infringement occurs. The MPEP 2173.05(p) provides an example from the In re Katz case: “A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA…

Read More

How does claim interpretation differ between patent examination and court proceedings?

Claim interpretation differs significantly between patent examination and court proceedings. During patent examination, the USPTO applies the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard, while courts use a different approach for infringement and validity cases. According to MPEP 2111: “Patented claims are not given the broadest reasonable interpretation during court proceedings involving infringement and validity, and can…

Read More

What is a broadened reissue claim?

A broadened reissue claim is a claim that enlarges the scope of the claims of the original patent. According to the MPEP, A broadened reissue claim is a claim which enlarges the scope of the claims of the patent, i.e., a claim which is greater in scope than each and every claim of the original…

Read More