The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Feb 1st, 2023, 12:00am

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Patent Drafting/Interpretation
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Specifying sequence of steps
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Specifying sequence of steps  (Read 1525 times)
smgsmc
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 269
Specifying sequence of steps
« on: Jul 14th, 2007, 10:53am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Hi.  This is a topic that popped up in another thread.  But I'm not sure of the conclusion.  
 
For a method claim comprising a series of steps (a)__, (b)__, (c)___,  my understanding is that simply writing such a claim does not specify that the sequence must be carried out in that order.  There were suggestions for contorted phrasing to get around this if the sequence is critical.  But could I be direct and make life simpler by writing:
 
A method for __  comprising the steps of (a)__, (b)__, (c)__wherein the steps are performed in the sequence listed.  
 
Or for those who are fond of "said":
 
A method for __ comprising the following steps, said steps to be performed in the sequence listed:  (a)__, (b)__, (c)___.
 
 
Thanks.
 
IP Logged
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Re: Specifying sequence of steps
« Reply #1 on: Jul 14th, 2007, 5:54pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I have used:
A method comprising the ordered steps of:
  (a) . . .;
  (b) . . .; and
  (c) . . . .
Also, phrases like "subsequent to step (a)" and the like.
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
PA
Guest
Re: Specifying sequence of steps
« Reply #2 on: Jul 14th, 2007, 6:32pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Another option:
 
A method, comprising:
doing a
in response to doing a, doing b; and
in response to doing b, doing c...
IP Logged
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Re: Specifying sequence of steps
« Reply #3 on: Jul 15th, 2007, 10:20am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 14th, 2007, 6:32pm, PA wrote:
in response to doing a, doing b

I'm curious as to what "in response" means in this context.  To me, there's a stimulus-response relationship in that "doing a" somehow triggers or otherwise inititates "doing b".  Might there be some confusion there?  A litigator might have a field day with it.
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
PA
Guest
Re: Specifying sequence of steps
« Reply #4 on: Jul 15th, 2007, 1:50pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

on Jul 15th, 2007, 10:20am, Bill Richards wrote:

I'm curious as to what "in response" means in this context.  To me, there's a stimulus-response relationship in that "doing a" somehow triggers or otherwise inititates "doing b".  Might there be some confusion there?  A litigator might have a field day with it.

I probably should have clarified that "in response to" was only an example.  My intention was to suggest that you could indicate ordered steps within the steps themselves, as opposed to the preamble or in a wherein clause.
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board