Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 04 MAY 2026

Flexibility Versus Indefiniteness: What It’s All About

In Enviro Tech Chemical Servs., Inc. v. Safe Foods Corp., the Federal Circuit recognized the permissibility of using “about” to “avoid a strict numerical boundary” for a claimed...

United StatesIntellectual Property

In Enviro Tech Chemical Servs., Inc. v. Safe Foods Corp., the Federal Circuit recognized the permissibility of using “about” to “avoid a strict numerical boundary” for a claimed parameter, but held the claims at issue invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). The court’s analysis highlights that the flexibility of “about” comes with a risk of invalidity, especially when the scope of the claimed range cannot be ascertained from the specification and prosecution history with reasonable certainty.

The “About” Clauses At Issue

The patent at issue was U.S. Patent No. 10,912,321, directed to “Methods of using peracetic acid to treat poultry in a chill tank during processing.” The court considered claim 1, which recites in part (emphasis added):

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from