Print

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

[khazzah]

I don't see where I "try to generalize further and suggest that pair generally means only two." I said it depends on the context and case law, which you seem to agree with 100% with respect to the use of "a single" in its context in Innovad.

It *always* depends on context and case law. Many of us try to surround our pronouncements with this disclaimer, but occasionally we forget.

Either way, it makes this board rather uninviting.

You're kidding, right? Disagreements, the occasional miscommunication and even failure to read carefully doesn't make the board uninviting. I find this board to be respectful to all comers --  new inventors,  experienced pro se inventors, new practitioners, and folks way more experienced than me.

[BobRoberts]

Perhaps the difference/distinction is between "a pair" and "one pair"...

Intelprop007, I've never found the board uninviting.  I've not really seen one member pandering to another either.  And the occasional 'argument' (though argument is a strong word for it- more disagreement) often gets me to think about a particular nuance that I may have not fully given weight to... 

I hope that you stick around, because it sounds as if you would have a valuable opinion to lend to the discussions...

Regards.

[Yak]

I also have to say that I have never felt this forum to be uninviting.  Over the year or so I have been participating and reading these post, I have learned an awful lot.  In fact this is the only "mentoring" I have.  I have been corrected on legal concepts and at least made aware of how not properly parsing legal language or glazing over things can lead to misunderstanding on more than a few occasions by Jim, Isaac, Bob, Karen and others and I sincerely appreciate their guidance and information. 

[khazzah]

khazzah originally said Innovad goes against "one controller" meaning "one controller." It does not, as khazzah acknowledges in the above post.

That's not exactly what I acknowledged. My acknowledgment related to use of a numeric designation *along with functional language*. 

I see the strict holding of Innovad as: "single switch [performing a function]" limits the number of switches that perform the claimed function. Other switches can be present, but they can't participate in the claimed function.

IntelProp007's example limitation "one controller" does not include functional language, so I don't think the strict holding of Innovad is applicable. But I do read Innovad as further saying (dicta?) that a numeric designation without functional language does not limit the number:

The term "single, bi-state switch," as well as the specification describing that term, do not limit the dialer unit to only one bi-state switch.
Innovad, 260 F. 3d 1326, 1333

So ... I stand by my original statement that Innovad goes against IntelProp007's original statement:

"comprising one controller..." is just that, one controller.

with the caveat that adding in functional language (as in Innovad) changes the outcome

Continuing with the Innovad analysis ...

I say that the reasoning of Innovad as to "single" also applies to "pair" .... or "one", or "two", or "three" or any other numeric designator.

[Isaac]

I say that the reasoning of Innovad as to "single" also applies to "pair" .... or "one", or "two", or "three" or any other numeric designator.

In fact, using the reasoning and context underlying Innovad, it is possible to make "the" refer to one and only one switch, when "the switch" is recited as performing a particular function.

[khazzah]

I say that the reasoning of Innovad as to "single" also applies to "pair" .... or "one", or "two", or "three" or any other numeric designator.

In fact, using the reasoning and context underlying Innovad, it is possible to make "the" refer to one and only one switch, when "the switch" is recited as performing a particular function.

You say "the switch", but isn't it the article/numeric designator that really matters?

So are you saying that "the" refers to one-and-only when the article "a" is used to introduce switch, ie, "a switch".

Or are you limiting your statement to the context of "[numeric designator] switch", ie, pair of, single, three, etc.

[Isaac]

Or are you limiting your statement to the context of "[numeric designator] switch", ie, pair of, single, three, etc.

Yes.  I am clearly limiting things to a particular context.

I'm saying that "the" can mean "one and only one" if enough context is applied, and that the type of context applied in Innovad is likely to force the same interpretation on "the switch", "the single switch" or "the one switch".

My point is that it isn't the particular numeric designator that does the deed, but rather it is the context that determines the meaning.