Print

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

[Xdim]

Hello,

Assuming the following is part of a claim:
"(a) connection means for separably connecting A and B... [etc.]"

I understand it would be ok to say -
"whereby, .... connecting A and B by connection means (a)... [etc.]"

But can I say the following if indeed I need to describe a case where A and B are parting ? -
"whereby, .... disconnecting A from B by connection means (a)... [etc.]"

Thanks, and I appreciate your input.

Xdim

[DJoshEsq]

get a patent attorney

[Bill Richards]

To expand on Josh's pithy, but erudite, advice, I found your example difficult to follow in the abstract.  A real example would be helpful, but not the real example.

[Xdim]

For example:
I defined a connection means for doing the followings:
- connecting two rods into one longer rod in a way allowing the combined longer rod to break back into the two original rods in certain desired ways under certain conditions.

Later, in describing a procedure in which the connected two original rods need to apart from one another I attempted to say: "disconnect first rod from second rod by said connection means.". But it feels odd to disconnect by connection means. and I wasn't sure if it's ok to put it that way.

Thanks.

Xdim

[still_studying]

Sounds like Xdim is talking about a method claim, perhaps?

I think you could argue that the ability to disconnect is inherent in a "means for separably connecting".  If you really want to, you could write "means for connecting and disconnecting", but that will get cumbersome.  Be sure the disconnecting actions are fully described in the specification regardless.

Please keep in mind that means-plus-function claims are interpreted narrowly, limited to the various "means" described in the specification.  I've been strongly advised never to use "means for" language when it can be avoided (this advice being mostly directed toward software patents, however).

In using Google's patent search feature, I've found a few patents claiming "means for separably connecting".  You might try digging around in that a bit.  I didn't find any which also had method claims involving disconnecting, but I only looked at a couple.
http://www.google.com/patents

To expand on Josh's pithy, but erudite, advice,

To further the use of inclusive terminology, I would suggest changing said advice to "get a registered patent practitioner".