What is “double inclusion” in patent claims?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-29 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. “Double inclusion” refers to the inclusion of the same element or component more than once in a patent claim. The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) 2173.05(o) states that there is no per se rule against double inclusion in a claim. As noted in the MPEP: “There is no per se rule that ‘double inclusion’ is improper in a claim.” However, the appropriateness of double inclusion depends on the specific context and language of the claim. The key consideration is whether the double inclusion leads to indefiniteness or uncertainty in the claim’s scope. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 10 rules Collapse No Per Se Rule Against Double Inclusion in Claims MPEP 2173.05(o) Reasonable Construction of Claim Language MPEP 2173.05(o) Recommended Claim Indefiniteness Due to Multiple Inclusion Must Be Evaluated MPEP 2173.05(o) Required Claims Must Particularly Point Out and Distinctly Claim the Invention MPEP 2173 Required Claims Must Particularly Point Out and Distinctly Claim the Invention MPEP 2173 Definiteness Requirement for Claims MPEP 2173 Required Claim Must Be Definite Under Section 112(b) MPEP 2173 Claims Must Be Clear and Definite MPEP 2173 Requirement for Clear Claim Language MPEP 2173 Permitted Claims Must Clearly Define Boundaries MPEP 2173 Required Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse How does double inclusion affect claim indefiniteness? How does double inclusion affect device claims in patents? How does double inclusion affect Markush groups in patent claims? Is double inclusion always improper in patent claims? What is the significance of In re Kelly in understanding double inclusion?