CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Patent claim

definition of the extent of patent protection

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 31, 2026
Entity authorityQ870860
Source-derived summary

In a patent or patent application, the claims define in technical terms the extent, i.e. the scope, of the protection conferred by a patent, or the protection sought in a patent application. The claims particularly point out the subject matter which the inventor(s) regard as their invention. In other words, the purpose of the claims is to define which subject matter is protected by the patent (or sought to be protected by the patent application). This is termed as the "notice function" of a patent claim—to warn others of inventor rights and infringement liability. The claims are of paramount importance in both prosecution and litigation.

For instance, a claim could read:

"An apparatus for catching mice, said apparatus comprising a base, a spring member coupled to the base, and ..."

"A chemical composition for cleaning windows, said composition substantially consisting of 10–15% ammonia, ..."

"Method for computing future life expectancies, said method comprising gathering data including X, Y, Z, analyzing the data, comparing the analyzed data results..."

Background

In most jurisdictions, a patent is a right to exclude others from making, using, importing, selling or offering for sale the subject matter defined by the claims when the claim is for a thing (apparatus, composition of matter, system, etc.). If a claim is for a method, the right to exclude would be to exclude any single party from carrying out all the steps of the claim. In order to exclude someone from using a patented invention, the patent owner, or patentee, needs to demonstrate in a court proceeding that what the other person is using falls within the scope of a claim of the patent; therefore, it is more valuable to obtain claims that include the minimal set of limitations that differentiate an invention over what came before (i.e., the so-called prior art). But the fewer the limitations in a claim, the more likely it is that the claim will cover, or "read on", what came before and be rejected during examination or found to be invalid at a later time for obviousness or lack of novelty.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Patent claim” as definition of the extent of patent protection. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 346-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Patent, claim and definition can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as definition of the extent of patent protection. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 31, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q870860. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Patent claim”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Patent claim primary sources, Patent claim archive and Patent research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Patent claim”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Patent claim” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.