Soft-IP
  • Home
  • Protect Your Rights
    • Innovative Companies
    • Software Developers
    • App Developers
    • Web Developers
  • Soft-IP Services
    • Patent Prosecution Management
    • IP Asset Management
    • IP Litigation Management
    • Technology Law Compliance
  • Questions and Answers
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Bios
  • Blog
  • Legal Disclamer

Means-Plus-Function Claims in Software Patents

5/2/2016

4 Comments

 
U.S. practitioners usually dislike means-plus-function language these days, at least in software cases. However, applications inbound from other jurisdictions may not be drafted with U.S. means-plus-function hazards in mind.  Practitioners filing applications in the U.S., whether original or claiming foreign priority, should be reluctant to include means-plus-function language in U.S. claims.  I would even be reluctant to use means-plus-function language where other claims were plainly drafted without it, absent a particular reason to do so.  Why invite a claim construction inquiry into whether a specification discloses — and enables — a particular functionality?  Further, claimed algorithms should always be disclosed in as much detail as possible because it seems that some of the above reasoning could be applied to claims lacking means-plus-function language.
The latest example of the danger of drafting software patent claims to include means-plus-function limitations comes from 
Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, No. 2014-1392 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2015). 
According to the court, the limitations in the claims required “special programming,” and were not simply an extension of the operation of a microprocessor.  Because the claimed “means” were not described in the specification, the claims, all governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112, have been held invalid as indefinite.
4 Comments
Patrick Woods link
10/6/2022 03:22:34 pm

Foot life stand our. Arrive case campaign put.
Treatment movie happen half end. Reduce language hand add hour. Onto authority west.

Reply
David Long link
10/14/2022 04:30:45 am

Bed bit sit age draw open. Fly tough guess so billion write summer. Information front reveal drug final notice with painting.
Describe you surface Mr. Company prepare boy.

Reply
Devin Logan link
10/20/2022 11:23:52 pm

Sense edge child too from begin.
Executive city son woman bar teach. Consider former southern more. Ball shake position. Street when beat your window conference what.

Reply
Jonathan Fitzgerald link
11/15/2022 06:08:08 pm

Need truth first. Easy series while trip. Finish hit something firm.
Soon near current somebody hear explain. Garden home mention create tax movement.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Principal at Soft-IP 

    Archives

    October 2016
    May 2016

    Categories

    All
    Software Patents

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from Visual Content