KudoZ home » Japanese to English » Patents

method claim structure in specification

English translation: (see explanation)

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
06:16 Sep 1, 2008
Japanese to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Patents
Japanese term or phrase: method claim structure in specification
In 課題を解決するための手段 (means of solving the problem), a passage resembles a method claim:
この目的の達成のため、本発明の...方法は
1)...するステップと、
2)...するステップと、
3)(主語1)が...し、(主語2)が...するステップと、
を有する

Is it necessary to translate this passage in the same way as required in the claims, namely:
In order to attain this object, the method of the present invention comprises:
1)...ing...;
2)...ing...;
3)(discussed below)

If so, than I am stuck with the problem of how to deal with the two subjects in the third step. I can avoid this problem if I have the freedom to write:
1) a step for …ing;
2) a step for …ing;
3) a step wherein subject 1 does such-and-such-1 and subject 2 does such-and-such-2

If I do have the freedom to translate this way, there is still a problem of inconsistent parallelism since the first two steps describe functions (for…ing) and the third step describes actions (subject does…), but I think this is only a problem of poor style, not non-compliance.

It seems to me that it would not be acceptable to include step 3 in the claims as written because of the appearance of subjects within the step, so this incongruence with claim structure could be an argument against writing the passage in claim structure.

To summarize my question:
1)Is it necessary to write the above passage of 課題を解決するための手段 in the same way as in the claims?
2)If so, how do I deal with the two subjects appearing in the third step of the method?
Eric Larson
United States
Local time: 21:05
English translation:(see explanation)
Explanation:
Generally, in specifications for Japanese patent applications, Means for Solving the Problem should be written as same as the claims for the clarification of the scope of the invention. Though, I am not sure that subject 1 and subject 2 are in the parallel relationship in one step, the method claim comprises time series processes, that is, in step 3, the processes for subject 1 and subject 2 are performed differently or at the same time. So, at first, you would better to clarify the method process in view of time series and translate it.

ex. 1) same time:
3) ...ing by subject 1 and (as well as) ...ing by subject 2
* subject 1 が...する: ...ing by subject 1
Selected response from:

yumom
Local time: 21:05
Grading comment
Thank you. In step 3), the process for subject 2, which is an apparatus, occurs immediately after the process for subject 1, who is a person. I took your advice into account and translated the 3rd step as "(verb)ing by (person) and (verb)ing by (apparatus).
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
4 +1(see explanation)
yumom
Summary of reference entries provided
cinefil

  

Answers


34 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +1
(see explanation)


Explanation:
Generally, in specifications for Japanese patent applications, Means for Solving the Problem should be written as same as the claims for the clarification of the scope of the invention. Though, I am not sure that subject 1 and subject 2 are in the parallel relationship in one step, the method claim comprises time series processes, that is, in step 3, the processes for subject 1 and subject 2 are performed differently or at the same time. So, at first, you would better to clarify the method process in view of time series and translate it.

ex. 1) same time:
3) ...ing by subject 1 and (as well as) ...ing by subject 2
* subject 1 が...する: ...ing by subject 1

yumom
Local time: 21:05
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in JapaneseJapanese
PRO pts in category: 32
Grading comment
Thank you. In step 3), the process for subject 2, which is an apparatus, occurs immediately after the process for subject 1, who is a person. I took your advice into account and translated the 3rd step as "(verb)ing by (person) and (verb)ing by (apparatus).

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Timothy Miller: I agree that as a general rule, the Means should be written with the same wording as that used in the claims. So you should pick the clearest wording, and use it in both sections.
19 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Reference comments


17 mins
Reference

Reference information:
FYR, please.


    Reference: http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/texts/pdf/ispe.pdf
    Reference: http://www.jfe-tec.co.jp/ip/topics/200701.html
cinefil
Japan
Native speaker of: Native in JapaneseJapanese
PRO pts in category: 80
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search