Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The forum software has been upgraded.  New registrations are not currently permitted while we iron out any bugs and other matters.  Please report any problems you find.

Author Topic: Order independence in a method claim  (Read 1071 times)

me262

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Order independence in a method claim
« on: 06-30-08 at 06:27 pm »

Hi,

  A method comprising

  a) do A
  b) do B
  c) do C

  What if the order of A) and B) are interchangable?  Do I need to do something special?

Thanks,

M.E.

Logged

still_studying

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 246
    • View Profile
Re: Order independence in a method claim
« Reply #1 on: 06-30-08 at 07:22 pm »

Avoiding numbering or otherwise ordering the steps is an idea.

1. A method of preparing a fish, the fish having a head, comprising:
scaling the fish;
gutting the fish; and
removing the head from the fish.

No order is implied.

3. A method of preparing a fish, the fish having a head, comprising:
(1) scaling the fish;
(2) gutting the fish; and
(3) removing the head from the fish.

Order is implied by the numbering.

If step (c) must be performed after (a) and (b), you could, for example, use a dependent:

2. The method of claim 1, where the removal step is performed last.
Logged
 



Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.075 seconds with 17 queries.