Would examiners accept a Claim 1 statement ending like this? :

...in order to execute transmission to, or connection therewith, the method comprising

So the issue is whether or not the claim must state just one of those options, "transmission to" OR "connection therewith" – assuming (as my specs arguably suggest) that the interface described can specify either one. [Note, this is in context of an attempted Continuation, trying to get broader claims.]

  • 1
    Isn't "connection therewith" more general than "transmission to"? Since connection encompasses transmission and reception I don't see the reason to have both statements. – Eric Shain Apr 28 at 20:00
  • Point worth considering, thanks. The original conception of the invention's primary action was for transmission (essentially, "upload" in most cases) of data to a network destination. The "connection" thought was based on trying to extend the concept as a signal-switcher or router. So trying to determine if just one statement covers all, as you apparently suggest it can. – Charles Apr 28 at 22:56

The words before "comprising" are the preamble. A preamble can be very uninformative in a claim for a thing (apparatus, device, machine, composition of matter, etc). "A device for opening cans comprising, x, y, z in some particular way" will be rejected if the examiner finds something comprised of x, y and z in that particular way that is not a can opener and couldn't practically open any existing can. This is because "intended use" is not a limitation for things defined by their structure. If you invent a new rake you do not want an infringer to get away with making the same thing and calling it a back scratcher.

However, the preamble does have an important role in a method claim. The steps that make up the limitation are steps to achieve a goal such that, by the last step, the preamble's stated goal is achieved. Unless very carefully crafted to cover an unusual case, it would be confusing to have two alternate outcomes in a single claim. Of course, you can can have more than one claim. You might want a claim of connecting and a separate claim of transmitting. In fact connecting and transmitting might be different things that take different sets of steps.

A beacon might transmit without ever making a connection. In some systems connecting might be a prerequisite to transmitting and you might want a claim that is infringed by the connecting whether or not any subsequent transmitting takes place.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.