Deciphering the Patent Claim Code
By Grace Schulz-Operations Manager and Patent Agent
9/22/2025
Have you felt like you’re reading a foreign language when looking at patent claims? Or, maybe you wondered how the claims your patent professional has written even remotely relate to your invention?
While claim language can sound like a jumbled mess, there are specific US Patent Office rules and US case law considerations that are important for drafting and interpreting claims.
Here are tips for deciphering the mysteries of patent claims to make sure you have the coverage you desire.
Independent vs. Dependent – The main claims are independent claims. Dependent claims refer back (e.g., “The system of claim 1”) to an independent claim and add limitations that further define the invention. However, someone can still infringe an independent claim even if they don’t meet the extra limitations added by its dependent claim. As an example, if the independent claim is for “a container” and a dependent claim states, “wherein the container is rectangular,” the independent claim still covers shapes other than rectangular.
Claim structure – Independent claims typically have a preamble ending with a colon, followed by a body listing elements separated by semicolons, with a final element ending in a period. The defining features of the invention are listed in the body of the claim.
To comprise or consist – The word “comprising” is interpreted in claims as including at least what’s listed, but more elements (e.g., components, steps) can also be included. For example, “a vehicle comprising an engine and a chassis” doesn’t exclude other components like tires or doors from being part of the invention. In another example, “a chair with three legs” covers a chair with four legs since it has three legs (along with one more). In contrast, “consisting of” is interpreted as meaning ONLY those elements listed are part of the invention. Thus, “comprising” (or alternatives such as “including” or “has”) is frequently used. However, there are instances where “consisting” is useful, such as to emphasize that the invention excludes other components that have been used in prior art.
Understand the articles – “A” in claim language is understood to mean “one or more.” If your invention has more than one “widget” but could work with only one, saying “a widget” gives you broader coverage than “widgets” which requires more than one widget to be present for someone to infringe. For example, “a chair with one leg” would include a chair with four legs (one leg plus three more). Also, “a” is used the first time an element is introduced (e.g., “a transistor”) and provides “antecedent basis” for later instances of the same element which use “the” (e.g., “the transistor”).
Picture it – Take the perspective of someone reading the claim without the patent drawings. Does the claim describe how components are connected to each other? Do any of the words have a meaning different than what is intended? Describing the invention accurately can help avoid misinterpretation and can strengthen the claim.
Be intentional – Think about every word in the claim. Are there extraneous words that make it easier for others to avoid infringement? For example, can extra components, method steps, or adjectives that are not part of the crux of the invention be omitted? Consider whether a broader term can be used (e.g., “fastener” is broader than “nail”). On the flip side, be sure the claim language clearly differentiates the invention from what’s been done before.
Writing and understanding claims can be challenging, and it’s best to work with a patent professional to help you translate your invention into language that provides strong patent coverage. If you’d like help translating your invention into strong claims, we offer a complimentary 30-minute consultation.