Print

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

[WebMan]

I have been reading a published patent application. I have noticed in the claims that they use the word "plurality".

My interpretation of the word plurality in the claim is that they are using the word to introduce more than one of an element.

I am wondering what word would be used if a claim needed to introduce ONE or more elements?

I was thinking that the word set would be appropriate since a set can included no elements, one element or many elements. But the problem here is that I would like to know of a different word to use other than the word set?

Any good ideas on what word could be used?

WebMan

I

[M. Arthur Auslander]

Dear WebMan,
The professional draftsman of a claim uses words that holistically give the best breadth to the claim. Just picking words can be confusing. The words themselves whatever they are are in the context of the invention.

Just getting a patent claim can be like giving away the world unless you understand the law.

[eric stasik]

Dear Mr. Webman,

Mr. Auslander is correct. You have to look at the whole claim not just one word. Normally a good attorney will draft a variety of claims of varying scope to cover such questions.

Writing claims is harder than rhyming orange. It is truly an art whose complexity cannot be explained in such a short reply.

Depending upon the specification, drawings, and prosecution history, etc. "plurality" could be argued to be one or more, or two or more, three or more, etc. It really depends on the whole picture. This is because applicants (especially in the US) are allowed to be their own lexicographers - you can define a word anyway you want to and you are not limited to a dictionary definition.

That being said, it is also important to realize that when it comes to the claims. every. word. counts.  Choose them carefully.

Good luck.

Kind Regards,

Eric

[JimIvey]

I don't use "plurality."  "Two or more" means the same thing and it's easier for me to read.

For "one or more," I use "one or more."  Again, I like it to be readable because I have to read it again when the rejection comes.

Technically, "one" means "one or more" because you don't avoid infringement by adding on.  Put in shorthand, if the claim recites elements A, B, C, and D and the accused device has elements A, B, C, D, and E, the device still infringes (absent successful application of the reverse doctrine of equivalents, but that's not worth considering here).

I still try to recite "one or more" rather than simply "one" because people who interpret claims don't always get it right.  

I hope that helps.

Regards.

P.S.  "Said" means "the" so I avoid "said" too -- using "the" instead.  It helps readability.

P.P.S.  Now don't go searching the PTO web site for patents under my name using "said" and "plurality."  Just because it has my name on it doesn't mean I wrote it.  ;-)

[M. Arthur Auslander]

Dear WebMan,
In reviewing your question and its answers, it has ocurred to me that you are getting free OUTSTANDING answer from three legally qualifed professionals. Not just legal hacks.

Just because it is free, don't waste the value you have been receiving even if it is free.

[patpend]

These gentlemen are all correct. However, the question you pose is tantamount to "What diameter suture do you use to close after neurosurgery" Just because they have given you very good advice, does not mean you should attempt to draft your patent yourself. No reputable professional would ever recommend a layman take a stab at drafting a real patent. Even if you get it, its scope and enforceability will likely leave much to be desired. There is a reason the USPTO recommends you not try this sort of thing on your own. If you just want a patent, give it a whirl. If you have something valuable to protect, go with a professional.

[M. Arthur Auslander]

Dear Patpend,

You are great, the problem is that there are still hacks out there that prey on the innocent and get patents that are worthless and should not be filed.

I use the Reality Check® to help protect the inventor. My feeling is that many inventors want patents and not "reallity".

[Mike Biagio]

Dear Webman,

If we are talking about the meaning of words for the sake of talking about them, I have condered the phrase "a number of" or "a multiplicity" or "a multiple of".

I dont believe I would ever choose to use them in a specification as there are too many holes (zero is also a number, multiplicity is ambiguous, and a fraction could also technically be a multiple of one.....

As stated previously by others on this forum, I believe that the correct manner in which to protect one or more items would be to claim only one, as any embodiment having more than one, would still have the one.

[JimIvey]

Bottom line in this thread: use English, be clear, and be perfectly precise.  The only exception that I can think of right now is "comprising" vs. "consisting of" where the former is inclusive and the latter is exclusive.

Re "one": that can be interpreted as (i) only one, no more than one or (ii) at least one.  Mr. Biagio is correct that the latter interpretation is the proper one, but not everybody gets it right (particularly judges and juries, and some attorneys in litigation will point out that the patent practitioner had the words "one or more" and "at least one" in her arsenal of language, yet purposefully chose not to use either) -- and the language "one" is not itself always sufficiently precise to exclude either interpretation (i) or (ii).

Regards.

[M. Arthur Auslander]

Dear WebMan,
The words should be selected for the reality of the invention. There is always room for improvement. That is why we have a patent system.