35 USC 112, 6th paragraph – “An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.”
Means or Step Plus Function – Although the use of the term “means” or “means for” is often a clear indication that the means or step for function rules apply, the actual determination is base coin whether the element in the claim is set forth, at least in part, by the function that it performs rather than the specific structure, material or acts that perform the function.
The examiner has the initial burden of finding a reference containing both the same function and same supporting structure, materials or acts as the applicant’s claim.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Claims that contain functional language evaluated the same way as claims that doe not include functional language. So, you can claim an item by claiming what it does in lieu of what it is.
For a means or step plus function, you can use functional language (e.g., amplifying means) to describe the set of apparatus identified in the specification. The structure and function must be disclosed in the specification, but it is ok to just refer to the function in the claims. The examiner will include the identified apparatus (disclosed in the specification) as anticipated by the specification.
I have no idea what this is trying to say.
I am so with you.
i think you would get a rejection of you were trying to draft a means-plus-function claim, but included a structure modification, or didn’t include functional language in the body.
claim:
A widget consists of A,B and means to hold A and B together
122 p6 says in the specification, the structure that performs holding A and B needs to disclosed. The scope the means of holding A and B as claimed is determined by the disclosure.
I think what Bo meant is that structure cannot be included in the MPF portion of the claim, If it is included, the scope of such language shall not be construed as “means plus more equivalents”
i.e. A widget consists of A,B and means to hold A and B by a nylon string … will not be construed as MPF, but rather as clearly defined
By contrast, If the nylon string is only disclosed in the specification, the means to hold A and B will be construed as the holding method by a nylon string or its equivalent, such as strings made of other materials.
Much better said
How do you get a 112 sixth para rejection? WHat is it?