US Law: comprised of = comprising

[Benjamin Barrett]

 From Robert Meadows on the Honyaku list:

In view of the interest of some members of this community in matters
patent, please note a recent decision by the Court of Appeals of the
Federal District that decides, for US patent practice, the meaning of
"comprised of".

Note that the district court had taken "comprised of" to be
restrictive, but was reversed by the CAFC, which equated "comprised
of" with "comprising".

Here is the url of the decision: http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1342.pdf.

This decision may be useful, inter alia, because it also contains a
discussion that compares "consisting of" and "comprising" in their
patent usage contexts.

Moreover, the reader will note the use of the "accused" patent or
case. This solves a particular problem in J > E translation, at least
for me, by indicating that the use of "accused" need not be
considered as relating only to persons, but in fact an inanimate
object (to the extent that a patent is an inanimate object) can be
"accused". I have also noticed "patent-in-suit" in other decisions;
another useful shorthand term in English.

Best regards,
Robert

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org