Alternativeness rejection refers to a situation in patent law where a patent claim is denied because it is deemed too broad. This type of rejection occurs when the claim seeks to cover not only the specific invention described but also unspecified variations of it. For example, using terms like "and similar materials" in a claim can lead to a rejection, as it does not clearly define the scope of the invention.
This term is primarily used in the context of patent law, particularly during the examination process of patent applications. Patent examiners assess claims to ensure they are specific enough to be granted protection. If a claim is overly broad, it may be rejected under the principle of alternativeness rejection. Users can manage aspects of this process by utilizing legal forms and templates provided by services like US Legal Forms, which can help in drafting precise patent claims.
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
Example 1: A patent application for a new type of biodegradable plastic that states, "This plastic can be made from various organic materials, including corn and similar materials" may face alternativeness rejection due to its broad language.
Example 2: A claim that specifies "a biodegradable plastic made from corn starch" is more likely to be accepted, as it clearly defines the material used (hypothetical example).
| Term | Definition | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| Broad claim | A claim that covers a wide range of variations. | May lead to alternativeness rejection if not specific. |
| Narrow claim | A claim that specifies particular aspects of an invention. | Less likely to face alternativeness rejection. |
If you receive an alternativeness rejection, consider revising your patent claim to include more specific language. You may want to consult with a patent attorney for guidance. Additionally, US Legal Forms offers templates that can assist you in drafting clearer claims to enhance your chances of approval.
Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.
It is a rejection of a patent claim due to its broad language that encompasses unspecified variations.