Patent claims are commonly understood to define the structure of
an invention, and claim limitations should delineate the
connections and relationships among claim elements.
Occasionally, claims are rejected during examination as
indefinite, with the Examiner pointing out that it is not clear how
the claim elements are interrelated and interconnected and/or that
there is insufficient structure in the claim. What sorts of
claim amendments or arguments should be considered?
It may be a first instinct to add physical structure to the claims,
such as fasteners or joiners for a mechanical invention or wires,
busses or connectors for electronic invention, etc. But, it
may be equally valid to add functional connectivity and
relationships among claim elements, without limiting to specific
physical features. Choice of which to pursue should be
carefully considered, so that claims are not unduly or
inadvertently narrowed in areas where they don't need to
be.
