Auch die USA kennen dieses Erfordernis. Du darfst nur eine ERfindung beanspruchen (Gesetztestext s.u.).
Im Gegenteil, es ghört zu beliebten Hobbys der Prüfer, die Uneinheitlichkeit zu bemängeln um weitere Gebühren zu kassieren, sogar bei PCT-Anmeldungen, die ja eigentlich in der internationalen Phase auf Einheitlichkeit geprüft werden und bei denen der nationale Prüfer gar nicht mehr auf Einheitlichkeit prüfen darf.
Gruß PatFan
§ 1.141 Different inventions in one national application.
(a)Two or more independent and distinct inventions may not be claimed in one national application,
except that more than one species of an invention,
not to exceed a reasonable number, may be specifically claimed in different claims in one national application, provided the application also includes an allowable claim generic to all the claimed species and all the claims to species in excess of one are written in dependent form (§ 1.75) or otherwise include all the limitations of the generic claim.
(b)Where claims to all three categories, product,
process of making, and process of use, are included in a national application, a three way requirement for restriction can only be made where the process of making is distinct from the product. If the process of making and the product are not distinct, the process of using may be joined with the claims directed to the product and the process of making the product even though a showing of distinctness between the product and process of using the product can be made.
Und die Rechtsfolge:
§ 1.142 Requirement for restriction.
(a)If two or more independent and distinct inventions are claimed in a single application, the examiner in an Office action will require the applicant in the reply to that action to elect an invention to which the claims will be restricted, this official action being called a requirement for restriction (also known as a requirement for division). Such requirement will normally be made before any action on the merits; however, it may be made at any time before final action.
(b)Claims to the invention or inventions not elected, if not canceled, are nevertheless withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner by the election, subject however to reinstatement in the event the requirement for restriction is withdrawn or overruled.