Claim language is important. Particularly when dealing with
software systems, claims may be held invalid as being indefinite
when the claim language is characterized as
"means-plus-function" under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112
¶ 6 (now AIA 35 U.S.C. §112(f)).
That is indeed what recently happened in Rain Computing,
Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., where the claims at
issue were directed to "delivering software application
packages to a client terminal in a network based on user
demands" and recited sending a "user identification
module" configured to perform various functions.
Under §112 ¶ 6, a "patentee may draft claims as a
means or step for performing a specified function without the
recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof. But
such claims are construed to cover only the structure, materials,
or acts described in the specification as corresponding to the
claimed function and equivalents thereof." (internal
quotations omitted).
