Tips For Meeting The Evolving Standard For Indefiniteness
Law360, New York ( May 4, 2015, 3:43 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court reigned in the Federal Circuit's indefiniteness standard for patent claims almost a year ago in Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc.[1] Recently, on April 27, 2015, the Federal Circuit revisited the issue applying the Supreme Court's new test for indefiniteness in the Nautilus case on remand from the court. The Federal Circuit's opinion demonstrates that balancing the competing interests of clarity in claim scope and the recognition that "absolute precision is unattainable" will take some time to establish.[2] In the meantime, it is useful to review some of the more notable Federal Circuit decisions interpreting the Supreme Court's new "reasonable certainty" standard to examine useful patterns that are emerging. Among other things, these decisions emphasize that the best way to survive an indefiniteness challenge when drafting claims is to use the language of the claims in the specification, provide sufficient examples, and avoid or carefully choose subjective language, "words of degree," and ambiguities in prosecution....
Law360 is on it, so you are, too.
A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.