How does indefiniteness apply to design patent claims?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-27 10 Rules 5 Related FAQs This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice. Indefiniteness in design patent claims is addressed in MPEP 1504.04 . The section states: “A claim is indefinite when it is unclear what design applicant is claiming.” This can occur in several ways: When the claim language is vague or ambiguous When the drawings are inconsistent or unclear When there’s a discrepancy between the claim and the drawings To avoid indefiniteness, the design claim should clearly define the article of manufacture and the ornamental design applied to or embodied in that article. The drawings should consistently depict all claimed features. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 10 rules Collapse Claim Must Identify Article of Manufacture MPEP 1504.04 Prohibited Claim Must Identify Article of Manufacture MPEP 1504.04 Permitted Design Patent Must Show All Claimed Elements MPEP 1504.04 Ex Parte Quayle Action for Design Patent Allowability MPEP 1504 Description Must Clearly Define Invention Variations MPEP 1504.04 Change in Design Configuration Introduces New Matter MPEP 1504.04 Design Patent Features Must Be Clearly Shown MPEP 1504.04 Permitted Requirement for Illustrating Ornamental Design MPEP 1504.04 Permitted Requirement for Ornamental Design Illustration MPEP 1504.04 Requirement for Correcting Drawings to Match Originals MPEP 1504.04 Permitted Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse What is the best mode requirement for design patents? How are broken lines used in design patent drawings? How are amendments to design patent applications evaluated for new matter? How do continuation and divisional applications affect design patent disclosure? What is the definiteness requirement for design patent claims?