Print

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

[alan_watts]

I'm struggling with patentese.

One problem that I have is that in a description of a complex apparatus which has a large number of elements where each element can be either singular or plural, writing sentences becomes a problem. If I use "at least one" 10 times in the row then the sentence is unreadable. On another hand if I use "a element"  then I'm wondering if I'm specific enough to let one skilled in art know that I could also use more then one element. Particularly in the following sentences where I say "the element", or should I refer to it later as  "the element(s).

Here are a few examples that I found in different patent applications. Some of them sound very awkward but are being used.

Which one do you use:
"a wheel"  and thereafter "the wheel(s)"
at least one wheel
at least a one wheel
at least one a wheel
one or more wheel
one or more wheels
one or more a wheels

Also what form would you rather use:

...limiting quantity of units...
or
...limiting quantity of a unit...

The first form implies plural because of the "s" at the end but the quantity could be just 1 unit.

The second implies singular but the quantity could be more then 1.

[McGregot]

Looks like nobody is qualified or capable to answer your question

[Wiscagent]

Probably no one has responded because the answer is so fact dependent.

Here’s one approach: write a claim with each item in singular form, then in a dependent claim explicitly stating that any of the items can be a plurality.  For example:

Claim 1.  A gadget comprising a power source, an on/off switch, and a light source, wherein the light source illuminates when the switch is in the on position.

Claim 2.  The gadget of claim 1 comprising a plurality of power sources, on/off switches, or light sources.

Alternatively just have claim 1, and make it clear in the description that “a power source” means at least one power source, and so forth.

[alan_watts]

Here is a specific example of what I'm talking about. It applies to the description of the invention and and not to the claims. I added in the bolierplate text that an "(s)" at the end of a word shall mean "one or more" of the lements described by that word.

In this embodiment of the invention an owner of a  timeshare-property or an authorized party, having a legal authority to limit a quantity of a share(s) issued for the timeshare property, exercises at least one legal right to limit a quantity of the share(s).  The  right(s) to limit the quantity of the share(s) is(are) exercised using a one or more  agreement(s), or a one or more declaration(s), or at least a one agreement together with at least a one declaration. Wherein said agreement(s) and/or declaration(s) is(are) legally or financially, or legally and financially enforceable, and obligates(obligate) at least one executing party legally and/or financially to perform as agreed and/or declared and limit the quantity of share(s) according to one or more provision(s) of the agreement(s) and/or statement(s) made in the declaration(s).

[alan_watts]

Can anyone suggest a better way of writing the above paragraph ? Common English is rather useless for writing logically correct sentences unless we take under consideration implied meanings that can be very controversial and misunderstood.  

[clarklawyer]

Here is a specific example of what I'm talking about. It applies to the description of the invention and and not to the claims.

Use of (s) in claims is a decidedly different matter from using such a thing in the description.

That said, my eyes glazed over half way through the second sentence of the example at least in part because of the faux plurals.

[alan_watts]

My question is not so much about using (s) but about how to write this paragraph better. I chose (s) because I thought that is will allow me to express the maximum of singular and plural variations with as few words as possible but my eyes glaze to when I read it .

[Mjohnson]

Since nobody is brave enough to tackle this one I will try.

I would probably brake it down into several parts. First I would discuss a one agreement and maybe a one declaration. Then I would refer to it simply as "the agreement" and "the declaration". This will make forming sentences much easier. Also, that way I don't have to address all the plural and singular combinations while I discuss the embodiment. Then at the end of the paragraph I would say something like this,

"It shall be understood to one skilled in the art that multiple agreements and/or declarations may be used as well as any combination of one or more agreements and/or declarations. Similarly a one or more legal rights may be exercised and one or more provisions or statements in the agreements and/or declarations may be binding."

As far as using "one or more element" or "one or more elements"  I don't believe it makes any difference. I have seen both being used. I prefer the later as it sounds better. You may also add "a" for "a one or more element" or "one or more of a elements" to make it more general. though I don't believe it makes any difference either. As long as you say "one or more" it means just that and whether follows either plural or singular doesn't make a difference. Though subsequently you need to refer to it as the "the elements".

I'd like to hear what other guys think about it.

[JimIvey]

I'd like to hear what other guys think about it.

Frankly, I don't think it matters in the least.  I just do what sounds gramatically correct to me.  If I chose one expression and the examiner forces me to change it, I'd sigh, roll my eyes, and change it.  I'd also be careful to assert that the amendment does not narrow the claim(s) in any way (for Festo purposes).  If deposed about it, I'd say that I made the amendment because I wanted the darned claim(s) allowed and I didn't believe the amendment changed the claim(s) in any substantive way.

Regards.

[pentazole]

Claim interpretations of "at least" and the use of singular and plurals, and the use of "about" and other modifiers is tricky.  In general what we do where I work is avoid things like "at least" and try to completely avoid plurals in the claims.  "a" and "an" are better choices.  In the end aim for every little modifier to have its own paragraph int he spec describing what it is.  So a good paragraph would be describing that "a", "an", "the" may be used interchangeably, that first, second, third, etc don't mean a specific order, define that plurals can mean singular and vice versa, etc. etc.

In the end, a claim should be easy to read, understand, and interpret.  Makes it easier to prosecute.  But every little detail in it has to have antecedent basis.  Even terms such as "at least" or "a" and "an".  If you don't have these prepositions defined in the spec, then if you use plurals in the spec, you will have trouble using singular int he claims.  etc.