Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Patentstudent]

I have a question:

What is the advantage or disadvantage of using a set of indepent claims (which range from broad to narrow) instead of using only one broad independent claim with dependent claims that narrow the scope of the invention?

Thank you in advance for your advice.

[Patentstudent]

Bump

[Isaac]

Anything that you write with dependent claims can be written in independent format. Independent claims cost much more if you use more than three of them.

It's possible to cover more variations with independent claims, but the examiner is likely to restrict between those variations if you do.

Generally the most cost-effective strategy is to write a few independent claims (around three) and to draft mostly dependent claims.

[JimIvey]

What is the advantage or disadvantage of using a set of indepent claims (which range from broad to narrow) instead of using only one broad independent claim with dependent claims that narrow the scope of the invention?

If you're asking because you came across an application and/or patent that has all independent claims when it could have easily used a lot of dependent claims, I have a guess as to the reason for that.

When Festo first came out, there were a number of strategies for avoiding the result of Festo.  And, one of those strategies was to file all independent claims, to avoid amending any claims. 

Subsequent case law seems to have pretty clear established that such isn't helpful in avoiding Festo, but there was a time when that wasn't so clear.

On the other hand, if you're thinking about doing that yourself and wonder what you might get for that approach, I don't think you get much of anything that would justify the extra claim fees.

Regards.

[ManOfManyBadIdeas]

What is the advantage or disadvantage of using a set of indepent claims (which range from broad to narrow) instead of using only one broad independent claim with dependent claims that narrow the scope of the invention?

If you're asking because you came across an application and/or patent that has all independent claims when it could have easily used a lot of dependent claims, I have a guess as to the reason for that.

When Festo first came out, there were a number of strategies for avoiding the result of Festo.  And, one of those strategies was to file all independent claims, to avoid amending any claims. 

Subsequent case law seems to have pretty clear established that such isn't helpful in avoiding Festo, but there was a time when that wasn't so clear.

What does that mean? If canceling a claim narrows the interpretation of a related claim, such claim cancellation
is viewed as a narrowing claim amendment during prosecution, even if the claim itself wasn't edited?

[ManOfManyBadIdeas]

Regarding the main question, I can only give two useless answers.

First, a trivial answer if each choice gives the same coverage.
Case A: Independent+ dependent claim
1. blah blah 1.
2. Claim 1; blah blah 2.
Case B: independent claims
1. blah blah 1
2. blah blah 1;
  blah blah 2.
Both claim sets are identical.

Second useless answer. If the coverage is not identical, then everything depends on the particulars of
the invention and the coverage, so one can't say anything beyond generalities. Broader coverage
is more desirable but harder to achieve in prosecution. The number of independent claims should not be
a choice, it is defined by the invention. The more truly independent claims can be made, the better but if the
independent claims are substituted for what should be dependent claims, it will most likely annoy USPTO
from examiner up. Even when required, independent claims make prosecution more complicated because
of possible restriction requirements.

[JimIvey]

If canceling a claim narrows the interpretation of a related claim, such claim cancellation
is viewed as a narrowing claim amendment during prosecution, even if the claim itself wasn't edited?

Yes.  Forfeiture of subject matter is forfeiture of subject matter.

Regards.

[Patentstudent]

Thank you all for the replies.

By the way, here there are no extra fees for additional independent claims.

[JimIvey]

If "here" is not the US, then Festo won't apply either.  There also might be no equivalent to the US's doctrine of equivalents.

In the US, there are extra fees for every independent claim over 3.

Regards.