操蛋, 没一个人回答, 老子自己解决了.
803.02 Markush Claims
A Markush-type claim recites alternatives in a format such as “selected from the group consisting of A, B and C.” See Ex parte Markush, 1925 C.D. 126 (Comm’r Pat. 1925). The members of the Markush group (A, B, and C in the example above) ordinarily must belong to a recognized physical or chemical class or to an art-recognized class. However, when the Markush group occurs in a claim reciting a process or a combination (not a single compound), it is sufficient if the members of the group are disclosed in the specification to possess at least one property in common which is mainly responsible for their function in the claimed relationship, and it is clear from their very nature or from the prior art that all of them possess this property. Inventions in metallurgy, refractories, ceramics, pharmacy, pharmacology and biology are most frequently claimed under the Markush formula but purely mechanical features or process steps may also be claimed by using the Markush style of claiming. See MPEP § 2173.05(h).
If the members of the Markush group are sufficiently few in number or so closely related that a search and examination of the entire claim can be made without serious burden, the examiner must examine all the members of the Markush group in the claim on the merits, even though they may be directed to independent and distinct inventions. In such a case, the examiner will not follow the procedure described below and will not require provisional election of a single species.
----------------------
Markush Groups
Markush groups are simply listings of alternative elements in a peculiar format. The practice began years ago when the patent offices were much stricter than they are today about refusing to allow the disjunctive term "or" in a claim. If a patent attorney claimed a chair, for example, he might well want to specify that the chair could be held together "with nails, screws, bolts, dowels, or glue". But claiming the alternatives in that way uses the term "or", which risks rendering the claim indefinite. After all, which of the connectors is being claimed? Markush groups solved that problem by using a stilted format relying exclusively on the injunctive term "and". The chair would be claimed as being held together with "at least one of a nail, a screw, a bolt, a dowel, and glue". Somehow that fiction is supposed to make the claim more definite.
The elements grouped in a Markush claim can be almost anything, from chemical compounds (Jan 2002):
4. The deproteinized natural rubber of claim 2, wherein said anionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of carboxylic acid surfactants, sulfonic acid surfactants, sulfate surfactants and phosphate surfactants.
to information processing (6892316 May 2005):
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the configuration data is selected from the group consisting of unique identifier data, architecture map data, field replaceable unit configuration data, and combinations thereof.
to methods of doing business (6892145 May 2005):
1. A method for collecting power distribution system data, said method comprising: communicatively coupling a plurality of node electronic units to a digital network, said plurality of node electronic units receiving at least one input signal sensed by a device selected from the group consisting of a current sensor, a voltage sensor, circuit breaker, and any combinations thereof; communicatively coupling at least one central control processing unit (CCPU) to the digital network; executing a data capture module, wherein the module comprises a data capture buffer and a secondary buffer; controlling said at least one central control processing unit to determine whether an event has occurred in the power distribution system based on said at least one input signal; and activating the data capture module in response to said event.
......from http://www.biopatent.cn/bbs/read.php?tid-435177-ds-1.html |
|
