Claiming too Broadly:<\/strong> Claims should be broad, however, there is a limit. Too broad claims apply to other devices or methods that fall under prior-art. For example, let\u2019s consider an invention that is an improvement in wrench using a rack-and-pinion arrangement for adjusting the jaws. It might seem broader to claim “a rack and pinion” rather than “a wrench comprising a jaw with a rack, and a rotatable pinion gear engaged with the rack.” But this will be counterproductive.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOur invention is not a rack and pinion. By claiming it, one has selected a claim broader than one is entitled to. The examiner may cite automotive steering against the invention, and that will be the right ground for rejection. Instead, claiming a wrench using the rack and pinion will narrow down the focus to tools, and the claim will have higher chances of approval.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
6. Inconsistent Terminology:<\/strong> The claims should always be drafted consistently. Claims containing inconsistent claim terms can result in unintended consequences during patent litigation. For example, if a motor has been recited in the claims, the drafter should not refer to \u2018the motor\u2019 with different nomenclature.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSimilarly, it is also advisable not to describe additional details of an element while referring to it. For example, if “a gear” has been recited, it would be improper to refer back to it as “the plastic gear” or \u201cthe drive gear\u201d. This will add an “indirect limitation” on the claimed element.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
7. Wrong Choice of Transition Phrase: <\/strong>The transition phrase is used between the preamble and the body of the claim. Each word has a special meaning that can severely affect the claims if used wrongly. For example: “Comprising” or “Comprises” are open-ended transition phrases, and include the following elements without excluding others. It is a preferred transitional word and is recommended for use in most cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n8. Avoid Using Trademarks in Claims: <\/strong>It is advised to use generic names rather than trademarks in claims. Trademarks only indicate a particular product or service and not the description of the product. In addition, the product made under the given trademark may change over time, but the generic description of the product remains the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n9. Overuse of Adjectives:<\/strong> Overuse of adjectives tends to over-describe the invention, restricting the scope of the claims. Therefore, unnecessary adjectives must be avoided while drafting claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n10. Keywords to Avoid in the Claims:<\/strong> The use of words, such as, exactly, can, could, must, might, prior-art, large, small, heavy, above, below, right, left, etc., should be avoided in the claims as a best practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n