The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jul 9th, 2020, 6:38am

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)
   Conditional Claiming
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Conditional Claiming  (Read 671 times)
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Conditional Claiming
« on: Jul 24th, 2007, 11:45am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Couldn't find this anywhere.
 
Here's a claim I'd like to submit:
A method, comprising:
(a)    determining if A is true or not true;
(b)    if A is true, do B; and
(c)    if A not true, do C.
 
Does one infringe if they only do step (a) and do B if A is true?  Only do step (a) and do C if A is not true?
 
Does is matter if:
 
A method, comprising:
(a)    determining if A is true or not true;
(b)    doing B if A is true; and
(c)    doing C if A not true.
 
Either form preferred?
 
Thanks.
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
MrSnuggles
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 119
Re: Conditional Claiming
« Reply #1 on: Jul 24th, 2007, 12:43pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

It's an interesting question of trying to prove a negative
 
I might suggest trying to construct the claim as:
 
1. A method comprising:
(a) determining whether condition is true; and
(b) performing X when condition is true.
 
2.  The method of claim 1, further comprising
(c) performing Y when the condition is false.
 
and then (maybe) an alternative set of claims
 
 
1. A method comprising:
(a) determining whether condition is true; and
(b) performing Y when the condition is false.
 
2.  The method of claim 1, further comprising
(c) performing X when condition is true.
 
 
I do write claims with a conditional test, but I don't use "if" because I think that it can infer an indefinite nature to a claim.  But that's just me.
IP Logged
Isaac
Senior Member
****




   


Posts: 3472
Re: Conditional Claiming
« Reply #2 on: Jul 24th, 2007, 2:02pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 24th, 2007, 11:45am, Bill Richards wrote:
Couldn't find this anywhere.
 
Here's a claim I'd like to submit:
A method, comprising:
(a)    determining if A is true or not true;
(b)    if A is true, do B; and
(c)    if A not true, do C.
 
Does one infringe if they only do step (a) and do B if A is true?  Only do step (a) and do C if A is not true?
 
Does is matter if:
 
A method, comprising:
(a)    determining if A is true or not true;
(b)    doing B if A is true; and
(c)    doing C if A not true.
 
Either form preferred?
 
Thanks.

 
With regard to a preferred form, in a previous discussion I couldn't locate with a quick search Jim Ivey posted his preferred approach to claims of this type with an explanation of why he preferred it.
 
The problem with claim 1 is some might consider it to be indefinite because the answer to your question about the scope is unclear.   Claim 2 is better in this regard, but IMO not the best.   I believe Mr. Snuggles' claims are consistent with what Jim suggests.
IP Logged

Isaac
JimIvey
Moderator
Senior Member
*****




  jamesdivey  
WWW

Posts: 2584
Re: Conditional Claiming
« Reply #3 on: Jul 24th, 2007, 3:19pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I think this is the topic referred to.
 
Regards.
IP Logged

--
James D. Ivey
Law Offices of James D. Ivey
http://www.iveylaw.com
Bill Richards
Full Member
***




   
WWW Email

Posts: 758
Re: Conditional Claiming
« Reply #4 on: Jul 25th, 2007, 12:23pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Thanks for all the good advice.  Here's a portion of what I've settled upon:
1.  Method
  (a)  determining whether condition of widget pressure is greater than or equal to marker pressure is true or false;
  (b)  determining whether condition of framulator property is greater than or equal to set property;
  (c)  performing A, when:
    (A)  condition of step (a) is true; and
    (B)  condition of step (b) is false;
or when:
    (A)  condition of step (a) is false; and
    (B)  condition of step (b) is true; and
  (d)  performing B, when:
    (A)  condition of step (a) is true; and
    (B)  condition of step (b) is true.
While this is not complete, and may not be rigorously logical, I think you'll get the idea.  In actuality, the claim is quite long, but I'm relying on the conditional language to keep certain steps out of the infringement analysis when one does not perform those steps which would not be required.
IP Logged

William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
Pages: 1  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