<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:blue;}
p.MsoHeader, li.MsoHeader, div.MsoHeader
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Header Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:blue;}
p.MsoFooter, li.MsoFooter, div.MsoFooter
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Footer Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:blue;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.HeaderChar
{mso-style-name:"Header Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:Header;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:blue;}
span.FooterChar
{mso-style-name:"Footer Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:Footer;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:blue;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
/* Page Definitions */
@page
{mso-endnote-separator:url("cid:header.htm\@01DA2456.3E034500") es;
mso-endnote-continuation-separator:url("cid:header.htm\@01DA2456.3E034500") ecs;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-footer:url("cid:header.htm\@01DA2456.3E034500") f1;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="2050" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="2" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Thanks for this and other responses.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">I think the correct (low risk) approach is to rewrite the claims without the term “and/or”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Why risk some weird Federal Circuit interpretation?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">I won’t say that “and/or” is a lazy way of writing, because I do it all the time and I know exactly what it means and what I mean. But the Federal Circuit has changed the rules of English grammar before.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">I’ll just take the issue off the table. (The claims are already being amended for other reasons.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Also, this application was written outside the US and there is no option to add something now to the specification explaining what “and/or” means.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Again, thanks to all for responses.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Alan Taboada via Patentpractice <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>"For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice." <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Friday, December 1, 2023 at 12:35 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice." <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Alan Taboada <ataboada@mtiplaw.com><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Patentpractice] The use of "and/or" in claims<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Not sure about a case citation, but the following is my view on this matter.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">There mght be situations where it doesn’t work out this way, but without further information, I think examiner might be correct
on this one.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">In general, “A and/or B” covers claim scope of “A and B” and “A or B” so any prior art that shows either would be relevant to the
claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Generally speaking, “A or B” is typically broader than “A or B” (again, we do not know the exact claim language, but I think that
typically this would be the case).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Since the examiner only needs to meet the limitations of either one of A or B to read on the claim limitation, then the examiner
will (rightly) construe the claim more broadly and not worry about having to find art that shows both A and B.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Patent Lawyer via Patentpractice<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 1, 2023 11:04 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Patent Lawyer <patentlawyer995@gmail.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Patentpractice] The use of "and/or" in claims<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">We've seen this before, but I cannot find the discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">In an office action, an examiner writes:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;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".<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">I believe the examiner is wrong! And I will point that out.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">BUT I recall that there was some case that discussed this.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">I would appreciate a pointer to a case or other reference discussing this issue.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Thanks in advance.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><br>
<br>
Links contained in this email have been replaced. If you click on a link in the email above, the link will be analyzed for known threats. If a known threat is found, you will not be able to proceed to the destination. If suspicious content is detected, you
will see a warning.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:windowtext">-- Patentpractice mailing list Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>