IPA patent 6.1.7.1.4-closed-and-open-definitions-and-implications-for-interpretation — IP Australia Patent Manual of Practice and Procedure – 6.1.7.1.4 Closed and Open Definitions and Implications for Interpretation

Also in this Chapter: 6.1.7.1.1 PCT Guideline References and Flow Chart 6.1.7.1.2 Overview of the Hierarchy 6.1.7.1.3 Special Meaning, Ordinary Meaning, Everyday Meaning 6.1.7.1.5 Implications of the Hierarchy on Searching 6.1.7.1.6 Practices for the Interpretation of Claims 6.1.7.1.7 Interpretation of Citations - Inherency A specification may include a definition for a particular term or phrase and that definition may be limiting or not limiting. An example of a closed definition for a claim to a fish hook is where the definition of fish hook is ‘a hook especially designed to catch trout’. In contrast, an open definition of fish hook is ‘a hook especially designed to catch underwater creatures including but not limited to trout’. Where a special meaning has an open definition and is therefore non-limiting, the ordinary meaning in the art is also invoked according to the hierarchy. In this situation, examiners should include an explanation to indicate why the ordinary meaning was also invoked. The specification may include a special meaning for a particular term or phrase which is closed, but the examples or figures include matter outside the scope of that definition. In this situation examiners should still use the special meaning to interpret the scope of the claim. It would otherwise be regarded as importing gloss from the examples if a different interpretation was given.