On clarity and precision of patent claims

By Luiz Alberto Rosenstengel
26/02/2025

A patent is a technical and legal document for economic purposes. It is a technical document because it describes a technological advance, a legal document because it defines rights for its holder, and an economic document because it generates effects in a specific market.

“The extent of the protection conferred by the patent will be determined by the content of the claims, interpreted based on the descriptive report and drawings.” (article 41 of the Industrial Property Law – Law 9279 of 14/05/1996)

Anyone who has ever faced the arduous task of preparing a patent application is aware of the difficulty of drafting claims with a scope that is consistent with the invention. Less restrictive wording of the claims, that is, using more open terms, tends to broaden the scope of patent protection, even going beyond the invention. Conversely, claims with more closed wording, with more precise terms, make the scope of patent protection very restrictive, making it easily circumventable.

In addition to the rules for drafting claims, article 25 of the LPI provides the following guidance: “As reivindicações deverão ser fundamentadas no relatório descritivo, characterizing the particularities of the request and defining, in a clear and precise manner, the subject matter of protection.”

In this sense, the Patent Examination Guidelines – Block I (INPI Ordinance 16, published on 09/02/2024) in topic 3.36 thus complement the concepts of clarity and precision of claims: “The clarity of the claims is of fundamental importance, since they define the subject matter of protection. Thus, the meaning of the terms of the claims should be clear to a person skilled in the art from the wording of the claim, based on the descriptive report and drawings, if any.”

The aforementioned Patent Examination Guidelines in their topic 3.42 clarify the need for technical sufficiency: “Uma reivindicação independente must specify all the essential characteristics necessary to define the invention…”

Since the claims must be interpreted based on the descriptive report, it is worth remembering the requirement of article Art. 24 of the LPI: “The report must clearly and sufficiently describe the object, so as to enable it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art and indicate, when applicable, the best form of execution.”

From the interpretation of the above rules it can be concluded that the claims must meet the following conditions:

  • Contain the essential technical characteristics of the invention, enabling understanding and reproduction by a person skilled in the art;
  • Detail the particularities of the invention;
  • Be clear and precise, avoiding an undesirable restriction or expansion of the invention;
  • Define a fair scope of protection provided by the patent.

Therefore, the claims must undoubtedly determine what the effective limits of the protection generated by the patent are, aiming to:

  • Inform the market about which characteristics of the invention cannot be reproduced;
  • To enable legal practitioners, especially the judicial expert and the judge himself, to assess any possible patent infringement by comparing the technical characteristics specified in the claims and the product accused of infringing.

In short, if the claims do not clearly and precisely characterize the particularities of the invention and the subject matter of protection allows, for example, executions below or beyond the invention, there will inevitably be uncertainty as to the real scope of patent protection and the consequent risk of legal uncertainty. Such a situation generates uncertainties that may cause harm to both parties: (i) to society with an undue restriction of the market and (ii) to the patent holder who may not succeed in legal efforts to prevent the free use of his invention.

 

by Luiz Alberto Rosenstengel – Partner at Leão, Mechanical Engineer and Industrial Property Agent.

31/03/2025

Crimes against patents

A Lei da Propriedade Industrial brasileira (Lei nº 9.279/96 – LPI), considerada uma das mais sólidas e eficazes normas de proteção aos direitos de propriedade industrial, abrangendo patentes, desenhos industriais, marcas e indicações geográficas, além de coibir a concorrência desleal. Sua relevância se destaca entre os diversos diplomas legais adotados por países membros da OMC […]

Read
11/02/2025

Cases of patent revocation

A patente é um título outorgado pelo Estado que confere ao seu titular o direito exclusivo de exploração de uma invenção por um período determinado. No Brasil, conforme disposto na Lei nº 9.279/1996 (Lei da Propriedade Industrial), o prazo de vigência é de 20 anos para patentes de invenção e de 15 anos para modelos […]

Read
05/12/2024

Protection of computer-implemented inventions

Nos anos 2000, o avanço tecnológico é marcado pelo desenvolvimento de softwares que aprimoram hardwares, transformando diversos setores industriais e impactando a vida cotidiana. Essas tecnologias dependem de softwares para controlar hardwares, implicando em maior esforço no desenvolvimento de softwares. Para acompanhar esses avanços, as legislações de propriedade intelectual se adaptaram para proteger tecnologias relacionadas […]

Read