Printable View
I’ve done some patent researches recently, and found a very frequent use of “said” in the patent description, for example:
“Gear # 12 is driven by said motor # 2 via said belt # 8….”
What is the function for those “said”s?
Why not just write as:
“Gear # 12 is driven by motor # 2 via belt # 8…”
Thank you in advance!
Sincerely,
JW
I agree with you. It sounds like surplus, archaic, "legal-ese" to me. Although, maybe in the world of patents, phrasings such as "said" doo-hingy are necessary to show a direct, incontrovertible relationship between the designer and the uniqueness of each and every part of his or her invention. I suppose the inference could be made that "said motor #2" is like no one else's motor #2.
Hope I helped~
Tctepreslm
I agree with tctepreslm.
Using 'said' here would only be common in a legal contract, or perhaps an old textbook.
You will also hear, "the above mentioned belt"... SAID and ABOVE MENTIONED are trying to help you understand a complicated instruction.
What if in sentence number 384 you read, "The belt then turns the cogburr."
You might think, what cogburr? What is a cogburr? Did I miss the place where they explained the cogburr, what it was, what it looked like?
To remind you that they DID already explain, in sentence number 204, what the cogburr was and what it does, they would say in sentence number 384, "The belt then turns the ABOVE MENTIONED cogburr," or "The belt then turns SAID cogburr."
It is still your job to find WHERE they mentioned the cogburr, but you know that they DID talk about about it, it is not a NEW part or idea.
"JW1212 wrote a post that asked a question about English. This posting was written well and had the word 'elephant' in it.
When Robert read the post he..."
OOPS! A lawyer would ask, when Robert read WHAT post? Which post is 'the post'?
So, in a legal contact, it would say, "When Robert read said post," or "When Robert read the above mentioned post..." to make it PERFECTLY clearn WHICH post I read.
Thank both tctepreslm and Robert to explain the function of "said" in patent description very clearly.
Here comes another puzzle. I read an abstract in an U.S. Patent as the following:
Abstract
A color REaD IOI system in which a light source illuminates the photoconductor so as to erase that photoconductor after the development of black toner but before exposure and development of the next color image.
Comment # 1:
So this abstract could be rewritten as
Abstract
A color REaD IOI system in which a light source illuminates the photoconductor so as to erase said photoconductor after the development of black toner but before exposure and development of the next color image.
Comment # 2:
I also have a problem with this abstract regarding basic grammars. The subject of the abstract is “ A color REaD IOI system”, following by an “in which” cause. But where is the verb of the subject? Without a verb, that is not even a complete sentence. However, I might miss something since those statements are examined by number of patent attorneys and patent examiners before being issued. I must miss something here!
P.S. That is referred to the U.S. Pat No 5,794,106