Key Decisions Involving Functional Claiming*

Precedential Opinions

Decisions reviewing functional claim language under 35 U.S.C. § 112


For a listing of all the Board's Precedential Opinions, click here

Informative Opinions

Decisions interpreting 'processor for' and/or means-plus-function claim language under 35 U.S.C. § 112



For a listing of all the Board's Informative Opinions, click here

Representative AIA Trial Decisions**

Decisions interpreting functional claim language in trial matters








The Board has a software issues committee to identify and discuss cases of interest related to software appeals and trials, particularly concerning functional claiming and issues under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112.

*Every Board opinion is, by default, a routine opinion until it is designated as precedential or informative. PTAB Standard Operating Procedure 2, Rev. 8 § V.A. (August 12, 2013). Opinions designated as precedential are binding on the PTAB. The purpose of a precedential opinion is to create a consistent line of authority as to a holding that is to be followed in future Board decisions. Informative and Representative opinions are not binding, but illustrate norms of Board decision-making.

**For more information about Trial Practice at the PTAB, click here.



Some content linked to on this page may require a plug-in for Adobe Acrobat Reader.