How can inventors avoid indefiniteness rejections when using functional language?

Inventors can avoid indefiniteness rejections when using functional language by following these guidelines derived from MPEP 2173.05(g):

1. Provide clear support in the specification: Ensure that the specification clearly describes the claimed function and provides sufficient details about how the function is achieved.
2. Use well-defined terms: Employ terminology that has a clear meaning to those skilled in the art.
3. Include structural limitations: When possible, combine functional language with structural limitations to provide clearer boundaries for the invention.
4. Avoid purely functional claiming: The MPEP states, “Unlimited functional claim limitations that extend to all means or methods of resolving a problem may not be adequately supported by the written description or may not be commensurate in scope with the enabling disclosure, both of which are required by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.”
5. Consider means-plus-function format: If appropriate, use the means-plus-function format under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), which allows for functional claiming with specific requirements.

By following these guidelines, inventors can increase the likelihood that their functional claim language will be considered definite and meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b).

To learn more:

• functional language
• indefiniteness rejections
• patent drafting
• claim construction