<div dir="ltr">There are enough cases around this that there is a Wikipedia entry: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And/or#Legal_criticism">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And/or#Legal_criticism</a><div><br></div><div>So long as the examiner is taking 'or' to be non-exclusive (i.e., such that 'A, B, or C' also encompasses combinations thereof), then I think there is no issue. If they are taking a different view, then they are improperly ignoring words of the claim. To avoid this debate, I typically use a qualifier ("at least one of A, B, or C") along with an explicit statement in the specification that this encompasses combinations thereof.</div><div><br></div><div>While we're at it, let's discuss that 'and/or' can mean 'and' or 'or' (obviously); per the above, 'or', in a non-exclusive sense, can mean 'and'; and CAFC case laws says that sometimes 'and' can mean 'or'! (Kaufman v Microsoft, 34 F.4th 1360, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2022)).</div><div><br></div><div>What fun claim drafting is.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:04\u202fAM Patent Lawyer via Patentpractice <<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="msg-1518363137874268369">
<div bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="m_-1518363137874268369WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">We've seen this before, but I cannot find the discussion.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">In an office action, an examiner writes:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:14pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">All claim limitations that include "and/or" are interpreted as "or". If applicant disagrees with this interpretation, they are invited to amend the "and/or" to "and".<u></u><u></u></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">I believe the examiner is wrong! And I will point that out.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">BUT I recall that there was some case that discussed this.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">I would appreciate a pointer to a case or other reference discussing this issue.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Thanks in advance.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</div></blockquote></div>