What is the significance of In re Kelly in understanding double inclusion?
The case of In re Kelly is significant in understanding the approach to double inclusion in patent claims. The MPEP 2173.05(o) cites this case to emphasize that there is no absolute rule against double inclusion. The MPEP quotes In re Kelly as follows:
“Automatic reliance upon a ‘rule against double inclusion’ will lead to as many unreasonable interpretations as will automatic reliance upon a ‘rule allowing double inclusion’. The governing consideration is not double inclusion, but rather is what is a reasonable construction of the language of the claims.”
This statement from In re Kelly underscores the importance of evaluating each instance of double inclusion based on its specific context and the reasonable interpretation of the claim language, rather than applying a blanket rule for or against double inclusion.
To learn more: