patent infringement

[tuka]

hello,
I read that "In order to infringe the patent, all the steps of the method must performed"

I am using this sentence in my provisional patent application
"A method for making advanced Health Care products by implementing at least one of the following features"

Does the expression " at least " good enough because I afraid that the examiner may reject one or more of the features such as using the biggest available size, adding a control unit...
Thanks

[smgsmc]

You start off concerned with infringement, but then end up concerned with rejections.  Not clear what your issue is.  But I'll make a stab with a general hypo.  Suppose the claim is:

1.  A method comprising at least one of the following steps:
performing A;
performing B; or
performing C.


If the claim is in an issued patent, then for infringement, the infringer has to perform only at least one of A, B, or C (that is, A only, B only, C only, any combination of two, or a combination of all three).

If the claim is in an application under examination, the Examiner can reject the claim under 102 or 103 if any one of A, B, or C is either anticipated or obvious in view of the prior art.  That is, if the Examiner finds prior art to reject A, sometimes he will stop there and not search for B and C.  I've had that happen.  Other Examiners are more thorough and will search for B and C as well.

[tuka]

Thanks.
1- If something is obvious but nobody made it and it is useful, can it be rejected?
2- If the provisional has no claims, how to protect the method points from examiner rejection and infringement later? can I say for example instead of "by implementing at least one " change it to
"by implementing the necessary elements for the user of the following"

[smgsmc]

1- If something is obvious but nobody made it and it is useful, can it be rejected?

Yes, a claim definitely can still be rejected as obvious even if nobody made it and it is useful.  Think of it this way, if someone had actually made it, the claim would be rejected for being anticipated by the prior art (lack of novelty in the EPO).

2- If the provisional has no claims, how to protect the method points from examiner rejection and infringement later? can I say for example instead of "by implementing at least one " change it to
"by implementing the necessary elements for the user of the following"

You're still confounding "rejection" and "infringement".  To avoid a rejection, the provisional must provide full support for a patentable claim in the nonprovisional (if you want the benefit of the provisional). 

If the patent is issued, and if someone infringes a claim, then you need to take legal steps to enforce your patent.  Not sure if this is what you're asking, but I'll raise another point:  A claim is useless if there is a trivial design around to avoid infringement.  For example, if you have the claim limitation "painting the surface red" and the color is irrelevant for proper functioning, then someone can avoid infringement by painting the surface green.

If you use the term "necessary elements" in a claim, you will likely get a rejection for indefiniteness, unless the criteria for what is necessary is clearly spelled out in the spec of the nonprovisional (with full support from the provisional if you want the benefit of the provisional).  In which case, you are better off not using the term in the claim; draft it properly instead.