by Steve Driskill | Nov 6, 2015 | [sub] intended use, Claim Interpretation
A limitation that only recites a correlation between a claim feature and a performance property does not carry any patentable weight. Here, for example, a “weight concentration ratio” claimed as being selected to correlate with how damaging the resulting solution is...
by Steve Driskill | Jun 7, 2013 | [sub] intended use, Claim Interpretation
A distinction predicated on merely on application to a particular class of users is likely to be found non-distinguishing intended use. Background / Facts: The application on appeal here from the PTAB is directed to automated methods of identifying relevant prior art...
by Steve Driskill | Feb 15, 2013 | [sub] intended use, Claim Interpretation
Performing an action to achieve a particular goal is properly limiting when the goal “provides the criteria by which the previously-recited [] limitation is analyzed.” For example, comparing memory locations “to verify” their accuracy indicates how the comparing is to...
