In the case of ABS Global, Inc. v. Cytonome/ST, LLC, No. 2022-1761, 2023 WL 6885009 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 19, 2023), the Federal Circuit has issued a precedential reminder pertaining to patent law vocabulary. Their ruling confirmed that the use of “a” or “an” can be construed to mean “one or more” in an open-ended claim unless determined otherwise by the claims, the specification, or the prosecution history. The court reinforced this is a long-standing general rule in patent law.
This case reiterates a principle similar to one cited in KCJ Corp. v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 223 F.3d 1351, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2000), where this court too underlined this interpretation of an indefinite article.
While this may seem to be a small detail, it carries significant importance in patent law. The Federal Circuit’s reminder underscores crucial distinction in claim interpretation and solidifies the precedent that indefinite articles extend beyond meaning the singular, and indeed include multiple entities.
As legal professionals, particularly those involved in patent law, it is critical to be aware of these nuances and interpretations upheld by the courts. Their impact on claim interpretation can be far reaching, having a significant effect on patent eligibility and infringement investigations.
Patent attorneys and their clients should be cognizant of this ruling when drafting and submitting patent applications and interpreting claims. An understanding of these precise interpretations could be the decisive factor in winning or losing a patent case, and shape the patent drafting strategy.