The Classification of Patents United States. Patent Office 542 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Classification of Patents
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: The Classification of Patents

Author: United States. Patent Office

Release date: September 20, 2007 [eBook #22685]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22685

Credits: Produced by Joe Longo and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was
produced from scanned images of public domain material
from the Google Print project.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE
CLASSIFICATION OF PATENTS ***

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE

THE CLASSIFICATION OF
PATENTS

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1915

PREFATORY NOTE.

Parts A and B of the following pages are designed to acquaint all persons
using the Patent Office classification with the principles upon which the
reclassification is proceeding.
Part C consists of a few tentative rules advanced with the notion of fixing
classification practice within the office in certain doubtful cases.
Part D is intended to inform examiners reclassifying within examining
divisions respecting the initial procedure in reforming a class.

CONTENTS.

A. Introduction. 1
Past classifications of the U. S. Patent Office. 1
Beginning of revision. 2
Precedents and authorities. 3
Definition of scientific classification. 4
B. Principles of the new classification of the Patent Office. 4
Elements of a Patent Office classification. 4
Basis of classification. 5
Art as a basis. 5
Function or effect as a basis. 7
Structure as a basis. 8
Division and arrangement. 9
Infinitude of possible combinations. 10
Division and arrangement in the natural
sciences. 10
Difficulty of entitling a subclass
corresponding to every combination.11
Expedients to reduce the number of
subdivisions. 12
Superiority and inferiority. 15
Definite positional relationship of
subdivisions. 16
Indented schedules. 17
Bifurcate division. 19
Utility of arrangement according to
resemblances. 19
Definition. 20
Cross-references and search-notes. 21
Diagnosis to determine classification. 22
Claimed or unclaimed disclosure. 22

Diagnosis of pending applications. 23
Difficulties due to varying ideas of
claims. 25
C. Rules of classification. 26
Basis of classification. 26
1. "Art" as the basis. 26
2. Operative or manipulative arts. 26
3. Structures. 26
4. Composition of matter and formed stock. 26
Division and arrangement. 27
5. Exhaustive division; miscellaneous
subclass. 27
6. Subclasses not to overlap. 27
7. Subclasses of any group to be formed on
one basis. 27
8. Apparent exception to rules 6 and 7. 27
9. Relative position of subclasses. 27
10. Indention of subclasses. 29
11. Different kinds of titles for subclasses. 29
12. Arrangement to limit search and cross
references. 30
Definition. 30
13. Tentative definition. 30
14. How to define. 30
15. Explanatory notes may sometimes
displace definition. 31
Cross-references and search-notes. 31
16. Impossibility of cross-referencing all
disclosures. 31
17. Occasion and direction of cross-
referencing. 31
18. Occasion and scope of search-notes. 32
Diagnosis to determine classification. 32
19. Patents diagnosed by claimed disclosure.
32
20. Patents diagnosed by most intensive claim.
33

21. Exception to rule 19, claim for a part of a
disclosed combination. 33
22. Exception to rule 19, claims for a part of a
disclosed combination. 33
23. Exception to rule 19, generic combination
old as matter of common knowledge. 34
24. Exception to rule 19, article of
manufacture defined only by material. 34
25. Exception to rule 19, utilizing a
composition. 34
26. Exception to rule 19, utilizing a machine.
34
27. Patents having claims for several different
inventions. 35
28. General rule of superiority between
statutory kinds of invention. 35
29. Exception to rule 28. 35
30. Process and apparatus. 36
31. Article of manufacture and instrument for
making a part of it or performing any minor
act relative thereto. 36
32. Process and product where search for the
process would have to be made among
machines. 36
33. Process and product where search for the
process would have to be made among
products. 36
34. Process of making a composition and the
composition where the process is peculiarly
adapted to make the composition. 37
35. Article of manufacture or composition and
process for making one of the parts of the
article or ingredients of the composition. 37
D. Procedure in reclassifying within examining divisions. 37
1. General attitude. 37
Procedure involving only cursory scrutiny of familiar
patents—

2. Consider wholes in forming tentative
subdivisions of subclasses. 38
3. Write tentative definitions of subdivisions.
38
4. Consider the significance of analogies
found to traverse parts of two or more existing
subclasses. 38
5. Arrange groups on parallel or accordant
lines where practicable. 38
6. Watch for subcombinations deserving
separate recognition. 38
7. Consider whether the groups collectively
will constitute a proper class and their best
correlation. 38
Procedure involving rigorous analysis—
8. Diagnose each patent for original
classification. 39
9. Group and consider the disposition of
patents deemed foreign to the class. 39
10-15. Consider and indicate cross-referencing
within and to and from the the class. 39, 40
Note. 40

THE CLASSIFICATION OF PATENTS

(A) INTRODUCTION.

Classification lies at the foundation of the mental processes. Without the power of perceiving,
recognizing resemblances, distinguishing differences in things, phenomena and notions, grouping
them mentally according to those resemblances and differences, judgment is impossible, nor could
reason be exercised in proceeding from the known to the unknown.

The facilitation and abbreviation of mental labor is at the bottom of all
mental progress. The reasoning faculties of Newton were not different in
qualitative character from those of a ploughman; the difference lay in the
extent to which they were exerted and the number of facts which could be
treated. Every thinking being generalizes more or less, but it is the depth
and extent of his generalizations which distinguish the philosopher. Now it
is the exertion of the classifying and generalizing powers which thus
enables the intellect of man to cope in some degree with the infinite number
and variety of natural phenomena and objects. (Jevons, Principles of
Science.)
PAST CLASSIFICATIONS OF UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE.
As under the patent laws the people of the United States assume all the risks
in granting a patent for any means of the "useful arts," a classification that
will facilitate a judgment respecting the patentability of any means
presented to the Patent Office is of peculiar moment. The enormous extent,
diversity, and refinement of the useful arts preclude the formation of a
judgment on novelty within a reasonable time, unless the necessary
comparisons with known processes and instruments have been previously
made along the lines that searches must follow and the results of such
comparisons made available in a classification. The vast majority of
available disclosures of the arts occur in patents. Hence the Patent Office
classification must be adjusted in the main to the analysis, diagnosis, and
orderly arrangement of the disclosures of patents.
For more than 80 years United States patents have been classified. The first
published classification, promulgated in 1830, comprised 6,170 patents,

divided into 16 classes. The change from a registration to an examination
system in 1836 instigated a new classification in 22 classes, including 9,800
patents. The next came in 1868 with 36 classes, including about 75,000
patents. On March 1, 1872, a revised classification was adopted, comprising
p. 2
145 classes, including 131,000 patents. This classification is said to have
been planned by Dr. Edward H. Knight. The placing of the patents in
accordance with the schedule of classes is said to have been done by the
several examiners. The class arrangement was purely alphabetical by class
titles, and the number designations followed the alphabetical order. The
names of things to be found in the several classes were arranged
alphabetically under each class title. No attempt was made to bring the titles
of allied materials into juxtaposition or to effect other definite arrangement
with reference to subject matter in the printed schedules. A consolidated
name index supplemented the list of names by classes.
This classification of 1872 is in part the classification that now exists, many
of the same class numbers and titles being still in use. Examiners were
apparently permitted to make changes in classification to suit their
convenience without notice until 1877. In that year a revision of the
published schedule was made by a committee, resulting in the addition of
13 new classes, and examiners were ordered to transfer patents in
accordance with the new titles. The first classification published with
distinct subclasses appeared in 1880. From that time until 1898 the
classification grew by addition and subdivision of classes to suit the ends of
individual examiners or in response to supposed exigencies of the work
where one division was thought to be overloaded and another underloaded,
and the alphabetical arrangement of subclasses under each class has
succeeded the alphabetical list of names. The arbitrary correspondence
originally established between the alphabetical order of class titles and the
numerical order was destroyed as soon as expansion of the classification
began.
However suitable to the then-existing material of the useful arts the
classification of 1872 may have been, it failed as fail all inductive processes
wherein the generalizations are not broad and deep. (Isaac Newton's
intellect could detect the resemblance between the falling fruit and the
motions of the planets.) The classification of 1872 was not exhaustive; it
failed to recognize to the fullest extent what Bishop Wilkins saw nearly 300

years ago, to wit, that there are "arts of arts;" and it failed to provide for
future invention of new species in the same art, and to recognize that new
arts could be formed from combinations of the old.
BEGINNING OF REVISION.
The Classification Division was created in the hope that guiding principles
of classification could be developed and applied for the purpose of
amending or revising the classification whereby patents could be placed
p. 3
with greater assurance, and whereby the searcher with these guiding
principles in mind might find the nearest references. It was confronted with
the problem of revising while at the same time keeping accurate record of
all changes, correcting all indexes of patents, and using copies in constant
demand for search at the same time, necessitating much clerical work, and
constant interruption—of correcting rather than planning anew; of mending
a machine while constantly increasing duty was required of it.
Ideas on the subject of revision were called for by the Commissioner of
Patents, and all in the Patent Office had an opportunity to set forth their
notions. The views of one met with approval and in accordance with those
views a "Plan of Classification" was prepared and promulgated in 1900.
What other plans may have been submitted is not now generally known.
But in substantial accordance with that published plan, the process of
revision has proceeded for more than 14 years until approximately 50 per
cent of the patents (including incomplete work) have been placed in revised
classes.
PRECEDENTS AND AUTHORITIES.
No effective precedents have been found in any prior classifications of the
arts. The classifications of the principal foreign patent offices have not been
materially different in principle from the United States Patent Office
classifications of the past.
The divisions found suitable for book classification for library use, have not
been deemed adequate to the exactness and refinement essential to a patent
office classification of the useful arts. The systems of class and subclass
sign or number designations of the modern library classifications, with their
mnemonic significance, afford the most important suggestions to be drawn

from library classification. None of these systems of designation has been
adopted, (1) because of a serious doubt as to the availability of such
designations by reason of the length or unwieldiness to which they would
attain in the refinements of division necessary in a patent office
classification, and (2) because of the enormous amount of labor necessary
to make the change from present practice.
The best analogies are in the known (but changing) classifications of the
natural sciences, and in them the problems are so different that they can
serve only to illustrate general principles. The broad principles of
classification are well understood. The authorities are the logicians from the
ancient Aristotle to the modern Bentham, Mill, and Jevons. The effort of the
Classification Division has been to adapt and apply these well-known
principles to the enormously diversified useful arts, particularly as disclosed
in patents and applications for patents.
p. 4
DEFINITION OF SCIENTIFIC CLASSIFICATION.
It may be well to insert here an authoritative definition: "A scientific
classification is a series of divisions so arranged as best to facilitate the
complete and separate study of the several groups which are the result of
the divisions as well as of the entire subject under investigation." (Fowler,
Inductive Logic.)
Investigation and study of any subject will be facilitated if the facts or
materials pertinent to that subject be so marshaled and arranged that those
most pertinent to it may appear to the mind in some form of juxtaposition. It
is the purpose of the Patent Office classification to divide and arrange the
body and multitudinous units of the useful arts so that, having the question
of novelty of any defined means to answer, one may with reasonable
assurance approach that portion of the rank of arts in which it will be found
if it is not new, and in propinquity to which will also be found those means
that bear the closest resemblances to that sought for, the resemblances of
other units growing less in proportion to their distance therefrom.
Success in the fundamental aim of facilitating adequate search should
evidently at the same time reduce proportionately the danger that interfering
applications will be overlooked and also effect a distribution of labor
favorable to the acquisition of special skill.

(B) PRINCIPLES OF THE NEW CLASSIFICATION OF THE
PATENT OFFICE.
THE ELEMENTS OF A PATENT OFFICE CLASSIFICATION.
A classification will be useful in proportion (1) to the pertinence to the
subject under investigation of the facts selected to be grouped together, or,
in other words, in proportion to the appropriateness of the "basis of
classification" to the subject in hand; (2) to the convenience, stability, and
uniformity of the arrangement of the subdivisions whereby the investigator
may proceed with reasonable assurance to that portion of the rank of groups
within which he will find cognate material; (3) to the accuracy and
perspicuity of the definitions of the several divisions and subdivisions; (4)
to the completeness and reliability of the cross-referencing and cross-
notations; (5) to the uniformity, feasibility, and certainty of the rules by
which the accessions of patents disclosing one or several inventions may be
diagnosed and distributed to the appropriate divisions of the classification
in accordance with the basis adopted.
Corresponding to the foregoing analysis the theory of Patent Office
classification may be treated in five parts: (1) The principles on which the
arts shall be divided (basis of classification); (2) subdivision and
mechanical arrangement of groups; (3) definition; (4) cross-referencing and
search-notes; (5) the choice of features by which a patent shall be assigned
in the classification (diagnosis).
BASIS OF CLASSIFICATION. p. 5

The first and most vital factor in any system of classification is the basis of
division, that is, the kind of characteristics common to any number of
objects selected to characterize groups, whereby the individuals of any
group will resemble each other for the purpose in view more closely than
any individual in any group will resemble any individual in any other
group.
"There is no property of objects which may not be taken, if we please, as
the foundation for a classification or mental grouping of those objects, and
in our first attempts we are likely to select for that purpose properties which

are simple, easily conceived, and perceptible in a first view without any
previous process of thought—but these classifications are seldom much
adapted to the ends of that classification which is the subject of our present
remarks." (J. S. Mill, System of Logic.)
It is clear that a number of objects may be classified on several different
bases. For example, a number of books could be divided into groups (1)
according to the subject of their contents; (2) according to the language in
which the books are written; (3) according to the size of page; (4) according
to the binding material; or (5) according to the color of the binding. Each of
these may be useful classifications for some purpose. For the student of
literature none is of value except the first; for the connoisseur in bindings,
only the last three. A classification of animals including classes of land
animals and water animals would hardly suit a student of zoology, as it
would associate with the shad and perch such differently organized
creatures as the porpoise, whale, and seal. Yet such a classification might
prove very suitable for a student of fisheries.
Art as a basis.[1]—So in seeking a basis for a patent office classification the
purposes of the classification should be the guide. Allegations of ulterior
uses[2] (such as may be made merely because the inventor thought of
applying his invention to those uses only, or in an effort to get the
application examined in a certain division) and other superficial bases
should be avoided. That basis will best suit the purpose which effects such
an arrangement as will exhibit in suitable groups the "state of the prior art,"
by which is here meant not necessarily all the instruments of a trade or
industry, or all the articles sold by a shopkeeper, as a stationer, but those
p. 6
means that achieve similar results by the application of similar natural
laws[3] to similar substances.
As all inventions are made with the ultimate object of satisfying some
human desire, the utility of an invention appears to be a natural basis of
classification. It is apparent, however, that most inventions may contribute
to numerous utilities besides the ultimate one. Many processes and
instruments intervene between the seed planter and the wheaten rolls upon
the breakfast table. The plow may be viewed as an agricultural instrument
or as an instrument of civil engineering, according as it is used for
preparing the field for planting or rounding a road. A radiating coil of pipe

may be thought of as a condenser of steam or of alcoholic vapors, according
as it is applied to one material or another; as a cooler or a heater, according
to the temperature of a fluid circulated through it. A hammer may drive
nails, forge iron, crack stone or nuts. Underlying all of these ulterior
utilities, there is a fundamental one to which the normal mind will reach in
its natural processes and there rest. The plow loosens or turns over the
surface of earth; the coil effects an exchange of heat between its interior and
exterior; the hammer strikes a blow. A classification of plows in agriculture,
road building, or excavating, according to stated ultimate use; of a radiator
coil as a steam condenser, still, jacket-water cooler, refrigerator, or house
heater; of the hammer as a forging tool, a nail driver, or a nut cracker,
appears to separate things that are essentially alike. But classifying a plow
on its necessary function of plowing, a radiator on its necessary function of
exchanging heat, a hammer on its necessary function of striking a blow,
evidently results in getting very similar things together. Assuming for the
moment that utility is a reasonable basis of division of the useful arts, it is
deemed more logical to adopt as a basis some utility that must be effected
by the means under consideration when put to its normal use rather than
some utility that may be effected under some conditions. Two of the five
predictables of ancient logic are property[4] and accident.[5] The capacity of
the hammer to strike a blow, the capacity of the radiator coil to exchange
heat, are in the nature of properties. The capacity of the hammer to crack
nuts, of the coil to condense steam, are in the nature of accidents—
p. 7
something that follows from the impact and the heat exchange because of
the particular accidental conditions of operation. To select an accident as a
basis of classification is contrary to the laws of thought.
It may be said then that the Patent Office classification is based upon "art"
in the strict sense in which the word may be said to be used in section 4886,
Revised Statutes, but not necessarily in the looser sense of industries and
trades. A proper maintenance of the distinction between the word "arts" of
the statute and the phrase "industrial arts" used in the sense of industries
and trades is essential to an effective classification for the purposes of a
patent office search. Similar instruments have been patented in three
different classes, because of the statements that one was designed for
cooling water, another for heating water, another for sterilizing milk; in four
different classes, because of the statements that one apparatus was to

separate solids from the gases discharged from a metallurgical furnace,
another to separate carbon from the combustion gases of a steam-boiler
furnace, another to remove dust and tar from combustible gas, and another
to saturate water with carbon dioxid. Owing to the continuance of a
classification based largely on remote use, many applications come into the
office setting forth inventions of very general application which
nevertheless have to be classified more or less arbitrarily in one of several
arts in which they may be used but to which they are not limited.
Function or effect as a basis.[6]—Means of the useful arts are related in
different degrees. Resemblances selected as bonds for a number of
inventions may be more or less close. It is axiomatic that close
resemblances should be preferred over looser ones for classification
purposes. Processes and instruments for performing general operations,
such as moving, cutting, molding, heating, treating liquids with gases,
assembling, etc., are more closely bonded than those for effecting the
diverse separate successive operations directed toward complex special
results, such as making shoes, buttons, nails, etc. Means of the former sort
perform an essentially unitary act—the application of a single force, the
taking advantage of a single property of matter. Those of the latter sort
require the application of several different acts employing frequently a
plurality of forces or taking advantage of several properties of matter. In the
former case, classification can be based on what has been called function, in
p. 8
the latter it cannot be based on function but can be based on what has been
called effect (or product).
Function is closely related to cause. It is an axiom of logic that cause is
preferable to effect as a basis of those classifications designed for scientific
research. Hence the functional basis is preferred in all cases in which it can
be applied. A condenser for the fumes of zinc is much more like a
condenser for the fumes of acid or the vapor of water than it is like the art
of recovering zinc from its ores, and it employs only one principle, to wit,
heat interchange. A water-jacket for cooling the walls of a gas-producer or
glass-furnace is much more like a water-jacket for cooling the walls of a
limekiln or steam-boiler furnace than it is like the art of gas-making or
manufacture of glass articles. In accordance with what are thought to be the
correct principles, therefore, the zinc-condenser ought not to be classified as
a part of the art of metallurgy, nor the water-jacket as a part of the art of

gas-making, merely because these instruments have a use in these arts, but
should be included, respectively, in classes based upon the more
fundamental utilities effected by them.
Although it is evident that molding a button is more like molding a door-
knob than it is like making buttons by the combined operations of sawing,
grinding, turning, and drilling, wherefore the molding of buttons should be
classified in a general plastic art rather than in a special button-making art,
yet the making of buttons by a plurality of different kinds of operations can
be placed only in a class based upon the product, to wit, button-making.
Since, therefore, the combination of many different operations for the
production of a specific article can not be classified on the basis of any
single function, it must be classified on the basis of product. Thus by
selecting essential function as a basis when possible, and resulting effect
when the functional basis is not possible, one may approximate to the
correct classification described by Herbert Spencer as follows: "A true
classification includes in each class those objects that have more
characteristics in common with one another than any of them have with
objects excluded from the class."[7]
So it is deemed better to classify in accordance with the function or effect it
is known a means must perform or accomplish than in accordance with the
object with respect to which an act or acts are directed or in accordance
with some effect which may or may not result.
Structure as a basis.—The phrase "structural classification" is frequently
made use of. The application of the phrase to processes is manifestly
absurd. The Patent Office never had a structural classification except in a
limited sense. How could a machine, for example, be classified on structure,
leaving out of consideration its function and the effect of its normal
p. 9
operation? In the refinements of subdivision however, it becomes frequently
desirable to form minor subdivisions on structural differences. And it may
also be that instruments will be presented for classification that are of such
general utility as to baffle the efforts of the intellect to attain to the
fundamental and necessary function, in which case a structure-defined class
may best suit the needs of classification.

As between a classification based upon structure and one based upon utility,
the choice has been for the latter, without prejudice, however, to instances
that may arise in favor of the former.
The subject of structural classification will be dropped with a quotation
from the original pamphlet "Plan of Classification," etc. (p. 5): "A purely
'structural' classification is almost impossible on account of the infinite
variety of mechanical combinations, and to attempt it would probably result
in utter confusion, for the classes could not be defined, and the
classification would be a mere digest of mechanical elements having no
community of function."
DIVISION AND ARRANGEMENT.

Having divided the aggregate of things to be classified into a large number
of groups on a satisfactory basis, a most useful work will have been
accomplished and the purpose of a classification to assemble the things
most nearly alike and separate them from other things will have been
partially achieved. Unless these numerous groups are arranged in some
definite understandable relation to each other, or are placed in definite
known positions where they can be found, the mere formation of the
groups, on however good a basis, is not a complete classification.
Furthermore, unless the position of each group with respect to those other
groups that resemble it in whole or in part is made known, he who wishes to
find other related matter must seek aimlessly with no assurance that his
quest will end until the whole series shall have been investigated. Each
classified group is metaphorically a pigeonhole to contain similar material.
If the pigeonholes are properly labeled, one can ultimately locate those that
contain the matter he is seeking if he knows the name that has been applied
to it. If the pigeonholes are arranged in alphabetical order, for example, he
may find all related material, provided he knows the name of every related
group of material, even though very similar things may bear names as far
apart as A and Z. But if all things were so placed that, adjacent and in
certain fixed relation to each pigeonhole, other related matter could be
found, the resemblances lessening in proportion to the separation, and if the
entire area of pigeonholes were divided, and certain areas assigned to
certain kinds of things defined in general terms, guessing the location of
and desultory search for things that may have different names, but yet be

very much alike, would be lessened and all cognate material be bunched. A
second vital factor of a system of classification, therefore, is the
arrangement of the groups.
p. 10
Infinitude of possible combinations.—There are now over 1,125,000 United
States patents, each presumptively covering a creation of the useful arts that
is different from every other. Most of these patents also disclose a plurality
of elements or acts. Each of these patented means is potentially an element
of a more complex combination that may be patented. When one considers
merely the number of forms of energy, the number of known substances and
known mechanical elements, and attempts to figure possible combinations
and permutations, it becomes apparent that the size of the numbers resulting
is incomprehensible. Consider the possibilities of combination also of the
enormously varied disclosures of patents. Calculations of the possible
combinations and permutations of a small number of objects are familiar.
Different combinations of the letters of the alphabet are sufficient to record
the sum of human knowledge in many languages. With substantially two
octaves of the diatonic scale the world's melodies have been sounded, nor
do any doubt that our successors will thrill to airs that we have never heard.
"Thirty metals may be combined into 435 binary alloys, 4,060 ternary
alloys, 27,405 quaternary alloys" (Jevons). This does not take into
consideration differences in proportion that figure so largely in results in the
arts of substance-making. The total number of possible alloys of the known
metals is incomprehensible. A moment's thought respecting the numbers of
the means of the useful arts will alleviate any fears that the possibilities of
invention are near the limit and will give food for further thought to all
concerned with this attempt to classify the useful arts to the point of
refinement necessary to enable this office to pass judgment with reasonable
speed and accuracy upon the approximately 75,000 applications filed each
year.
Division and arrangement in the natural sciences.—Some of the natural
sciences are said to be in what is known as the classificatory stage of
development. In some sciences the subject of classification has been
predominant and these furnish excellent examples of scientific
classification.

The much-admired classifications of zoology, botany, and mineralogy are
among the best available models of logical division,[8] systematic and
analytical arrangement. The most casual consideration of these
classifications, however, renders apparent the relative simplicity of the task
of classifying natural objects differentiated by fixed natural laws as
compared with the task of classifying the products of the creative and
imaginative faculties as applied to the useful arts. The chimera and other
animal monsters occur only as figments of the mind. Zoological
classification does not have to classify combinations of birds, fishes,
reptiles, and mammals, nor does it deal in the way of classification withp. 11
the
parts of animals, nor is the question of absolute numbers of instances a
matter of moment to such a classification, all of the members of a species
being alike for classification purposes. But any instrument of the useful arts
may be combined with some other, any part with some other part.
Organizations may be parts of some other organizations, or even mutually
parts of each other, as, for example, a pump may be a part of a lubricator, or
a lubricator may be a part of a pump. Some parts are peculiar to one
instrument, some are common to many. Every member of a species differs
from every other member. Added to this, the intellectual differences
between the persons who present the applications for patent, the differences
in their generalizing powers, the relatively broad and narrow views of two
or more persons presenting the same invention (variations not indulged in
by nature) complicate the problem of classifying the useful arts.
Difficulty of entitling a subclass corresponding to every combination.—In
any main class or group of the useful arts there are always a number of
characteristics that it may be desirable to take note of in subdivision titles.
A moment's thought shows the impossibility of taking care of any large
number of combined characteristics so as to provide exactly for each
combination, for the reason that the limitations of space and of the
perceptive faculties forbid. For a simple illustration, the imaginary
classification of books for use by a bookseller may be recurred to. The
dealer, it may be assumed, has books on (1) four different subjects, history,
science, art, and fiction, (2) each printed in four languages, English,
German, French, Spanish, (3) in four different sizes of page, folio, quarto,
octavo, duodecimo, (4) bound in four materials, leather, rawhide, cloth,
paper. Here are four main characteristics, each in four varieties. A customer

is likely to ask for Ivanhoe in English, octavo, bound in leather. Now if the
bookseller had sought to arrange the books into one class according to
subject matter, into another according to language, another according to
size, another according to binding, he would have fallen into confusion,
because his classes would be formed on different principles or bases and
overlap. Some histories will be in French, some will have octavo pages, and
some cloth bindings. But if he divides first on the basis of subject matter,
then each subject matter into language, each language book into sizes, each
size into material of binding, he can immediately place his hand on a class
wherein the book will be if he has it; but this classification, based on four
different characteristics and four varieties of each, has necessitated the
formation of 256 classes or divisions, and if five characteristics were
provided for, 1,024 divisions would be required.
Adapting the illustration of the books to a patent office classification: If it
p. 12
were possible to view these characteristics as patentable in combinations of
all or in any combinations less than all, and also as separate characteristics,
16 divisions additional to the 256 for each independent characteristic would
have to be provided, as well as other divisions for combinations of less than
the whole, in order to make the classification absolutely indicative of every
feature, and the number of divisions would be enormous. In such a
classification, after the proper division had been located, the search would
be nothing, the difficulty would be to find the appropriate class.
Expedients to reduce the number of subdivisions.—Fortunately most people
carry on their mental processes in accordance with certain uniformities.
Under this uniformity of thought no patentable relationship may be alleged
between a quarto volume and the subject of history or between a leather
binding and the German language; wherefore 4 classes of coordinate value,
based on the 4 characteristics, each divided into 4 subclasses, 16 divisions
in all, may serve the purpose of a Patent Office search. But if, as sometimes
happens, a patentable relationship had been assumed and admitted between
a leather binding and any of the languages, or any of the subjects, or
between any two or more of those different characteristics, provision could
be made for such combinations by the following expedients:
(1) Arrange the characteristics, in the order of relative significance or
importance for the purpose in view, in four groups, giving each group the

characteristic title. Under each title arrange the varieties in a similar relation
as follows in either (1) or (2):

(1) (2)
Cl. X.—Books. Cl. X.—Books.
0. Miscellaneous. 1. Subject-matter—
0.5 Subject-matter— 2. History.
1. History. 3. Science.
2. Science. 4. Art.
3. Art. 5. Fiction.
4. Fiction— 6. Language—
4.5 Language— 7. English.
5. English. 8. German.
6. German. 9. French.
7. French. 10. Spanish.
8. Spanish. 11. Size—
8.5 Size— 12. Folio.
9. Folio. 13. Quarto.
10. Quarto. 14. Octavo.
11. Octavo. 15. Duodecimo.
12. Duodecimo. 16. Binding—
12.5 Binding material— 17. Leather.
13. Leather. 18. Rawhide.
14. Rawhide. 19. Cloth.
15. Cloth. 20. Paper.
16. Paper 20. Paper.
p. 13
Subject-matter, assumed to be the most important characteristic, is placed
first. Any exhibit of mere material for binding, mere size, mere language, or
mere subject-matter, would fall into the correspondingly entitled group. If,
however, a book on history in German or a history in red leather, etc., were
to be classified, it would be placed in subclass "History" in the subject-
matter group, and a French book in green cloth would be placed in subclass
"French" in the language group. That is, combinations of any characteristic
with any one or more other characteristics may be placed in the group for
that characteristic deemed the most significant and which is highest in the

schedule. Again, by assigning a number to each generic title, each such title
becomes thereby the miscellaneous group for varieties other than those
indented under it, as well as for all varieties associating any characteristic
with one or more of those standing lower down. Thus, a book of poems
would belong in subclass "Subject-matter" and a 16mo volume bound with
purple celluloid covers would belong in subclass "Size." So, by giving
meaning to relative position, exhaustive arrangement is sought to be
provided in a reasonable number of groups. To provide for other features
that may be presented in future, an additional miscellaneous group may be
added at the top (1), or the class title (2) might be deemed to represent the
unclassified residue and a depository for future matter not specifically
provided for.
(2) If the number of instances of association of subject-matter and binding
materials, language and size, etc., are numerous, additional groups might be
placed above the groups having the names of the characteristics, the fact of
the existence of these groups indicating that the characteristic groups are for
single characteristics only and do not include books having several different
ones. In such case the schedule might be headed by a miscellaneous group,
having either the title "Miscellaneous" or the title of the class, to receive
associated characteristics not provided for by specific titles, immediately
followed by subclasses for the particular associations found to be most
numerous, as follows:
books.

Miscellaneous.
Subject-matter and language.
Subject-matter and binding material.
Subject-matter.
Language.
Size.
Binding material.

To illustrate further, selecting for the purpose a mass of objects presenting
p. 14
problems more nearly like those presented to the office in questions of
patentability, let it be assumed that one is to classify the objects in a heap of
metal scrap.

On looking over the material of the heap it is noticed that there are a large
number of metal balls; some have holes through them, some are hollow,
some are smooth on the outside, and some are hollow, smooth, and
perforated, but they are all nevertheless balls, and accordingly all balls can
be separated out and placed in a heap by themselves. Next, the presence of
bars in the general mass is observed, some long, some short, some straight,
some twisted, some of round stock, some of square stock, etc. These may be
gathered together and placed in a separate pile at the left of the balls. It is
further observed that there are many differently shaped annular bodies in
the heap resembling generally the single links of a chain, some circular,
some elliptical, some twisted, some made of round stock, some of square
stock, etc. They are all nevertheless annular bodies; these may be placed in
a separate pile at the left of the bars.
Now, in the remnant of the original heap, a sufficient number of similar
single elements does not remain from which to make a smaller pile of
elements. Different combinations of links, balls, and bars are, however,
observed in the remaining heap. Some are combinations of links, some
combinations of a ball and link, some of a bar and link, and some of a bar,
link, and ball. These different combinations may be separated out in the
order named and placed in separate piles. After all these things have been
removed, there is left in the original heap a number of odds and ends or
miscellaneous metal objects.
These several groups may now be arranged in the inverse order in which (in
the particular illustration adopted) they have been removed, thus:

1. Miscellaneous (remnants of the original heap of scrap).
2. Combined bar, link, and ball.
3. Combined bar and link.
4. Combined bar and ball.
5. Combined link and ball.
6. Chains.
7. Links.
8. Bars.
9. Balls.

Knowing that objects of metal scrap not covered by the specific titles will
be found in the miscellaneous group, and that the more complex
specifically-named things are to be found first after the miscellaneous or at
the left of the row of piles of materials thus separated and arranged, and the
more simple things and parts farther to the right, the particular piles to
p. 15
resort to for the things wanted may be definitely determined. The same
processes may be applied to each of the piles. Thus, balls, in the above
illustration, may be divided into—

Balls—
10. Hollow perforated.
11. Hollow grooved.
12. Hollow.
13. Perforated.
14. Grooved.

Again, the same processes may be applied to a mass of more diversified
junk, of which the metal scrap may form one pile, rags another, old bricks
another, old timber another, and, still another, timber having metal-straps,
bolts, nails, etc., connected with it.
Superiority and inferiority.—In the arrangement of subclasses in a class,
those groups that are related to each other as wholes and parts are arranged
so that the wholes shall stand before the parts, and so that subclasses
defined by effect or by special use shall stand before those defined by
function or general use. For example, in the scrap illustration above,
assuming the titles to be in a printed arrangement, "chains" precedes
"links," which may be parts of chains, and if it had been desired to separate
animal-drags, for instance, from the scrap, some animal-drags being
particular adaptations of a bar, links, and ball, the group of animal-drags
should precede "Bar, link, and ball." The words "superior" and "inferior"
have been used to indicate this relationship. A class or subclass defined to
receive a certain combination is superior to one defined to receive an
element or a combination that is a part of that certain combination. A class
or subclass defined to receive means for making a particular product, as an
electric lamp, is superior to a class or subclass designed to perform a
general function, as pumping air from a container. And whenever a question
of assignment of a patent or application that contains matters of two or

more groups bearing that relation is raised, the "superior" group is selected
to receive it.
Further, in those instances in which groups are formed on different bases or
different characteristics, not comparable with each other, and a patent is
presented having matter falling in each group, that group which is highest in
position is preferred in those instances where separate provision for means
having both characteristics has not been made.
In cases of necessity, as where a combination is presented for which no
class has been definitely provided, but classes exist into which the several
parts would fall if separately claimed, the same practice that obtains in
similar situations with respect to two or more subclasses of a class may be
followed with respect to two or more classes and the patent placed inp.that
16

class which, in accordance with above-stated principles, should be deemed
the "superior."
Definite positional relationship of subdivisions.—In the metal scrap
example, above, division has been effected on the one basis of form or
contour. If it had been desired to separate also on material, for example, if it
were deemed important to locate all brass scrap, each of the groups based
upon form could be divided into one of brass and one not brass, or the
entire heap could be divided into brass and not brass, and under the
heading "brass" could be indented the various articles made of brass, and
under "not brass" the various articles not made of brass, and this would
double the number of divisions. If also it were desired to separate the lead
articles in the same manner the number of classes would be tripled. But, as
in the book illustration, it may be impracticable thus to multiply
subdivisions, and the basis "form" having been selected as of first-rank
importance, all divisions based upon form should be completed and kept
together. Then, "material," having been selected as of second-rank
importance, should be carried out with respect to all objects in which form
is non-essential. If enough brass balls were found to render it advisable to
make a subdivision of them, they should be assembled into a subclass
indented under "balls" and not into a subclass indented under "brass."
Having selected one basis as primary, it should never subsequently be made
secondary or vice versa. Some such restriction on modes of division
appears salutary in a system of divisions designed to definitely limit search.

The arrangement herein sought to be explained is susceptible of use to limit
all searches for a single definitely stated invention to a subclass properly
entitled to receive it or those indented under it, and to those subclasses
above, which may include it as a part of an organization or specialized
means.
As between coordinate groups divided on the same basis, there is no
question of superiority and inferiority. The terms "superior" and "inferior"
are useful in questions of relationship between combinations and
subcombinations or elements thereof, and between groups founded on effect
or product and those founded on simple function. The mere difference in
complexity of mutually exclusive coordinate groups involves no
relationship of superiority or inferiority. A subclass to receive a screw-
cutting lathe is superior to a subclass to receive a lathe-headstock, a
locomotive class is superior to a class to receive steam-engines, for the
reason that the lathe is a whole of which the headstock is a part, and the
locomotive is an organization of which the engine is an element. But the
headstock subclass is not superior necessarily to the tailstock subclass
simply because the headstock is commonly more complex than the
tailstock. Yet arbitrary preference for classification in the headstock
p. 17
subclass may be established by position where an application or a patent
contains claims for both.
Thus in a class that is founded on a well-chosen basis that brings together
things bearing close resemblances to each other, all types that contain the
elements essential to produce a complete practically operative means will
be found in subclasses that have a position somewhere between the
beginning and end of the list of subclasses of the class. Those that add
features of elaboration of the essential types and those that are highly
specialized to some particular purpose within the definition of the class will
stand above the essential type subclasses, while those subclasses for parts
and details will stand below those for the essential types.
Indented schedules.—In an indented schedule all subclasses in the first
column reading from the left are species to the genus represented by the
class title.[9] All subclasses indented under another subclass are species to
the genus represented by the subclass under which they are indented. If a
title has no number, it represents merely a subject-matter to be divided, a

genus,—having no representatives except in the species under it. If a
subclass having a generic title has a number, it not only represents a
subject-matter to be divided into species but also all other species not
falling within the titles indented. Although these relative positions might
imply that only proximate species are indented one place, yet mechanical
difficulties render it impracticable to so arrange that all species shall be
indented under their proximate genera.
Indention properly carried out has a tendency to prevent in the process of
logical division the logical fault of proceeding from a high or broad genus
to a low or narrow species. This latter fault may inadvertently separate
things that belong together. If, for example, it were desired to divide balls in
the stated illustration according to material, an immediate division of balls
p. 18
into aluminum, zinc, glass, ivory, rubber, would be less useful than to divide
into mineral materials and nonmineral materials as follows:

Balls—
Mineral—
Nonmetallic—
Glass.
Metallic—
Aluminum.
Zinc.
Nonmineral—
Vegetable—
Rubber.
Animal—
Ivory.

However, it is evident that indention carried to its full extant, useful as it is
in keeping analogous things together, would make the printing of schedules
complex and unwieldy. Nevertheless, in the generalizing process necessary
in logical division and arrangement, the divisions of species should always
be mentally indented, as it were, under their proximate genera. Thus, under
a genus unnamed may be arranged several species in juxtaposition, without
actually printing the name of the genus, so that the schedule above may
read:

Balls—
Glass.
Aluminum
Zinc.
Rubber.
Ivory.

In an arrangement printed in idea-order, though relegating the genera
mineral, nonmetallic, metallic, nonmineral, vegetable, animal, to the mind
unaided by printed words, the different species of the same genus may be
kept together except that species for which no title has been provided must
go back to the subclass under which the named species are indented. Thus
the arrangement above necessitates placing in subdivision "Balls" all
copper balls, whereas indention under proximate genus "metal" would have
brought all metal balls together. In a finely divided classification, printing
of titles for all genera is not practicable; hence great care ought to be
directed toward grouping species according to the principles of arrangement
herein outlined, noting that whenever a change of basis is made, a new
genus is implied, and that subclasses for all other species of the same genus
under whatever name, must be brought into juxtaposition as if indented
under the implied genus.[10]
p. 19
Bifurcate division.—Most discussions of classification make reference to
the so-called bifurcate scheme of division as the only one by which
exhaustive division can be surely achieved. This is commonly illustrated by
the ancient tree of Porphyry. By this method any subject it is desired to
subdivide is first divided by writing the name of one selected species at one
branch and writing at the other branch the name of the same species
prefixed by "Not." Thus the Agassiz classification of living beings divides
them first into sensible and not sensible (plants). A botanical classification
divides plants into flowering and not flowering. A zoological classification
divides animals into vertebrate and not vertebrate. By continuing the
process of division in the same manner, the division is obviously exhaustive
of the subject, there being always a negative subdivision to receive any
subsequently created or discovered species. Although bifurcate division has
been ridiculed by some, it is agreed by highest authority that it is the only
plan of division by which one can be sure to have a consistent place for
everything, or by which one can be certain that the divisions are mutually

exclusive. It can be demonstrated that a classification schedule in which the
relation of genera and species is shown by indentions, if correctly formed
on the principles now sought to be applied in the revision of the Patent
Office classification, is susceptible of conversion into a tree of Porphyry,
while unlike the latter it is compact and wieldy.
Utility of arrangement according to resemblances.—The expedient of
indicating kinds of relationship between several equally indented divisions
by relative position has the following utility:
(1) A uniform rule is provided, applicable to all classes, for placing
inventions that bear the relation of whole to part in subdivisions before
those that bear the relation of a part to that whole, and those that are defined
by a particular effect, product, material, or use before those that are defined
by a function or an operation applicable generally to various effects,
products, materials, or uses; whereby that portion of the schedule in which
any invention belonging to any particular class should be found may be
approached whether or not the investigator knows the name of the object
sought for or the title of the appropriate subdivision.
(2) The substantial impossibility of dividing many branches of the useful
arts exhaustively into a reasonable number of mutually exclusive or non-
overlapping subclasses is compensated for; so that when the classifier or the
searcher has an invention to place or to find including two or more different
kinds of characteristics, for each of which a subdivision is provided, but no
subdivision for the plural characteristics, it will be known that the invention
should be in the subclass for that characteristic which stands before the
subclass for the other characteristic.
(3) It compensates for omission of some generic titles that if written inp. 20
the
indented schedule would lengthen specific titles to a cumbersome extent.
(4) It provides a rule for cross-referencing where several inventions are
claimed bearing to each other any of the relationships indicated above,
cross-referencing being necessary in one direction only where the matter
illustrated is coextensive with the matter claimed.
(5) It definitely limits the field of search for any unitary invention in any
class so arranged, as no patented invention having the limitations imposed

by a unitary claim should be found in any subclass below the subclass
properly defined to receive it or those indented under it. Parts of such
inventions may be found below or following this subclass in the same class
if these parts are within the class definition, or elsewhere in the useful arts if
not within that definition. The unitary invention may be found in the
subclass limited to it and certain subclasses arranged above or before it
adapted to receive organizations of which it may be a part.
A complete system of arrangement should comprise (1) a display of the
entire field of the useful arts in a manner to show the relation of the larger
as well as of the smaller groups,—carrying the appropriate relationship as
far as possible from the highest genera to the lowest species, the
arrangement being such as would bring materials most nearly alike into
closest propinquity regardless of the names they may be called by. (2)
Supplementary to this classification arrangement by ideas there should be
an alphabetical index of subclass titles, appropriately cross indexed, and
additional titles of various technical and trade names of things classified
under subclass titles.
DEFINITION.

Definition is indispensable in any classification and is very difficult. Every
class must be defined and all of the groups under it. After definitions have
been made and printed, they are sometimes found inadequate and must be
supplemented by the definitions of other classes. This is unavoidable while
the complete material remains unexplored. Definition in the strict logical
sense is not to be expected, nor is it necessary. It is commonly sufficient if
an explanation or comparison be made sufficient to direct the mind to the
character of the contents of the group and indicate its limitations. Hitherto
four of the five predicables of ancient logic have been mentioned, to wit,
genus, species, property, and accident. In connection with definition, the
fifth predicable, difference, is useful. To define a class, it is sufficient,
generally, for the purposes of office classification, to state a peculiar
p. 21
property (not an accident) of the objects included in the class; and to define
a species under the class it is sufficient to state the name of the class plus
the difference—i. e., with the addition of the limitations that characterize
the species.[11] This procedure in definition is susceptible of application
from the highest genus to the lowest species. It is advisable to define the

means included within a title without any introductory words, such as "this
subclass includes inventions relating to," etc., treating the subclass for
definition purposes as if it were a collection of concrete things, in the same
manner as in a dictionary definition.
CROSS-REFERENCES AND SEARCH-NOTES.[12]

If patents were in all respects like material objects, cross-references and
search-notes would not be necessary. Nails, screws, locks, hinges, and
boxes are distinct things susceptible of definite separation and
classification. Even though nails, screws, locks, and hinges form part of the
box, the box is still a box, not a nail, screw, hinge, or lock. For the needs of
the Patent Office classification, however, although a patent for a box must
be classified with boxes, yet if a peculiar nail, screw, lock, or hinge is
claimed in the same patent with the box, or even if any one of these
customary accessories of boxes is illustrated, it may be necessary to provide
copies of the patent for the box in each of the several classes provided for
nails, screws, locks, or hinges.
Inasmuch as every relatively complex thing is made up of relatively simple
things, it is obvious that all disclosures can not be cross-referenced. Any
attempt to calculate the number of cross-references to be supplied if all
disclosures of the subjects of invention were to be cross-referenced would
show the number to be incalculable. It is necessary, therefore, to leave to the
judgment of the classifier the propriety of cross-referencing unclaimed
disclosures.
Should a patent contain a number of claims defining a number of differently
p. 22
classifiable inventions, complete cross-referencing from the class in which
the classification is made original into the other appropriate classes or
subclasses should be effected, unless cross-search notes or arrangement of
subclasses with appropriate titles may be substituted to advantage.
Cross-referencing or cross-search notes are made, as a rule, from
combination class to element class, but never or very rarely from the
element class to the combination class in which it may be used. Thus cross-
referencing should normally be downward in a schedule of subclasses.
Search notes indicate parallel or otherwise related classes and subclasses,

and those classes and subclasses in which analogous structures having
different purposes but adapted to answer broad claims may be found.
By arbitrary rules of arrangement such as have been referred to in the
section dealing with division and arrangement, a search may ordinarily be
definitely limited to a certain number of subclasses, even where cross-
references are not made. In such arrangement any given patent, if it be
directed to one invention, may be searched in the subclass within which the
definition places it or subclasses indented under it, and in certain subclasses
above, whose titles will indicate that the invention might be included as a
part of the matter defined to belong therein, but it would never have to be
searched in any subclass following and not indented thereunder.
DIAGNOSIS TO DETERMINE CLASSIFICATION.

Each patent and each application discloses one or more means of the useful
arts (using the term "means" to cover both processes and instruments in the
sense in which it is used by Prof. Robinson), almost always more than one,
since most new means are combinations of mechanical elements or acts. In
some patents and applications the disclosure is coextensive with that which
is claimed; in others there is matter disclosed but not claimed. The
unclaimed disclosure may be as valuable as the claimed disclosure for
purposes of anticipation, and the classification must provide for both. If the
claimed disclosure belongs in one class and the unclaimed in others, the
classifier must choose between two or more classes that one in which the
patent or application shall be classified and those into which it shall be
cross-referenced.
Claimed or unclaimed disclosure.—The claims of a patent are the statutory
indices of that which the applicant believes to be new, they define an
invention that has been searched by the Patent Office and no anticipation
discovered for it. Future action must be based on inductions from past
experience; none knows what the future lines of search will be; the only
guides for future searches are the searches of the past; the evidence of past
p. 23
searches is the claims of patents; they trace the course of invention.
Furthermore, a presumption of novelty attaches to the claimed matter; no
such presumption attaches to the unclaimed. The law requires every patent
for improvement to show so much of the old as is necessary to explain the
uses of the improvement. In practice much more than that is disclosed.

Questions as to the proper placing of patents and cross-references would be
diminished by the strict enforcement of Rule 36 of the Rules of Practice
requiring that the description and the drawings, as well as the claims, be
confined to the specific improvement and such parts as necessarily
coöperate with it. In any event both the claimed disclosure and that which is
unclaimed must be taken care of, one by cross-reference, and the disclosure
selected for cross-reference is that to which no presumption of novelty
attaches.
This practice of placing patents by the claimed disclosure is sometimes
misunderstood. Its chief application is in determining classification in case
of disclosures involving a plurality of main classes. Furthermore, the mere
letter of the rule is not to be applied in preference to its spirit.
Subcombinations claimed may be placed with the combinations, and in
subordinate type subclasses patents must be placed sometimes by claimed
and sometimes by not-claimed disclosures.
Diagnosis of pending applications.—What has been said relates to patents.
The bearing of the practice of adopting the claimed disclosure as the basis
of assignment of applications for examination has also to be considered.
Two pending applications claiming the same means very commonly differ
in the kind and extent of disclosure. One application may disclose several
inventions. Which of the several disclosures shall be selected as the mark
by which to place the application? For instance, the typical wire-nail
machine has a wire-feeding mechanism, a shearing mechanism, an
upsetting (forging) mechanism, side-serrating mechanism, and pointing
mechanism; it may also have a counting mechanism, a packaging
mechanism, an electric motor on its frame for furnishing power; and, in
addition, numerous power-transmitting and other machine parts, such as
bearings, oil-cups, safety appliances, etc. The applicant may have made a
complete new organization of nail-machine and may seek a patent for the
total combination. He may have invented a new shearing mechanism and
have chosen to show it thus elaborately in the place of use he had in mind,
or he may have designed a new counter or a new oil-cup or a new power
transmission, or even a new motor, and have given his invention this
elaborate setting. The shears, the counter, the oil-cup, the power
transmission, and the motor are separately classifiable in widely separated

classes. How shall the application be diagnosed for determining its place in
the office classification? When the specification and drawing disclosep. 24(as
most of them do) several subjects matter of invention, though claiming only
one, which of those several subjects matter shall control the classification?
The most natural procedure, at first thought, would be to classify on the
totality of the showing, in which case the application for the nail-machine,
supposed above, would be assigned to nail-making. But imagine the
invention claimed by an applicant to be the counter. Then the examiner in
charge of nail-making would have to search the class of registers with
which he is not familiar. Suppose applicant No. 2 files an application for the
same counter which he illustrates and describes in connection with a bottle-
filling machine, and that, classifying on the totality of the showing, this
goes to the division that has the class of packaging liquids. Now both the
examiners in charge of bottle-filling and nail-making, knowing that
counters are classified in registers, search the class of registers and also the
pending applications in registers. After these examiners have made their
searches, suppose applicant No. 3 files an application for the same counter,
which he says may be used for counting small articles produced by
automatic machines. Perhaps he shows the counter attached to a piece of
conventional mechanism representing any manufacturing machine,
mentioning, say, a cigarette or pill or cartridge-making machine. It has not
occurred to either the the examiner of nail-making or the examiner of
bottle-filling that the other might have any such application; nor does it
occur to the examiner in charge of registers to search nail-making or bottle-
filling. As the specification of the counter application mentions cigarette,
pill, and cartridge-making machines to which the counter may be attached,
the examiner in charge of registers may search those classes. Suppose that
the counter proves to be new, and each of the three examiners allows a
patent. Here now are three patents for the same thing. Of course, after
allowance, the counter and all other disclosed inventions that give any
suggestion of novelty are cross-referenced; but the primary purpose of a
patent office classification (to aid in determining patentability) has failed in
this instance.
In the imagined situation respecting pending applications, without doubt
diagnosis and classification upon the invention claimed is necessary to

effect the purpose of the office classification. Cross-referencing after issue
can not undo that which has been done.
If no application save that of the nail-machine be pending, no duplication of
patents occurs, but the labor of search is increased by reason of the
unfamiliarity of the examiner with the inventions he has to search. After the
patent is allowed he may find the entire combination of the nail-machine
without the counter disclosed in a patent for a nail-making machine, so that
p. 25
as a nail-making machine this new patent is of no value as a reference. Very
probably all of the other inventions illustrated (except the counter) are also
old in their respective classes; but the examiner of nail-making can not tell
this without extensive searches in those classes, so he notes cross-references
for them all.
Difficulties due to varying ideas of claims.—Very troublesome questions
are constantly arising as to whether an invention should be classified in a
combination class or an element class. The point will be illustrated by
example: A describes and illustrates an automobile having an internal-
combustion motor and a friction-clutch in the motor transmission-gear. He
states that the clutch is in the usual relationship to the motor and gearing,
but claims a new clutch for whatever it may be adapted. B discloses an
internal-combustion motor said to be for automobiles with transmission-
gearing and a friction-clutch and claims "in an internal-combustion motor a
friction-clutch," etc., specifying the form of the clutch. C makes the same
disclosure, but claims "an internal-combustion motor having a specified
clutch," while D, with the same disclosure, claims "the combination with
the internal-combustion engine of an automobile" of a specified friction-
clutch. E claims and illustrates only the friction-clutch. Should these be
classified together? If so, in what class? Should a bearing composed of a
specified alloy of copper, tin, and antimony, be classed as a bearing or as an
alloy? Should a house painted with a mixture of linseed oil, lead oxid, and
barium sulphate go to buildings or coating compositions? A lamp-filament
of titanium and zirconium with electric lamps or with alloys? A building-
block of cement, lime, sand, and carborundum, with building-blocks or
plastic compositions? Whether these be diagnosed as combinations or as
elements and compositions respectively, and classified accordingly,
criticism will be aroused. The point in view is that although principles of
patentability must be considered in a classification designed as an

instrument to aid in determining patentability, convenience and accuracy of
search and avoidance of voluminous cross-referencing may necessitate
some arbitrary rule of classification to meet various and changing theories
applied to the drafting and allowance of claims.
From the foregoing it will be evident that classification involves orderly
logical processes of induction (supplemented by hypothesis), of definition
and of deduction. After gathering a large number of facts generalizations are
made from them and a hypothesis is found to be confirmed or modified by
more extended research; the divisions are then defined; by correct diagnosis
of other instances (as other patents) deductions may be drawn respecting the
appropriate place for them in the classification.
[1] An "art," in the sense of a single unitary invention, is a synonym of process, method, p. 26
and
operation. The term "art" is ambiguous in popular usage. In the phrase "useful arts" in the
Constitution, it denotes the area of endeavor to which the patent laws apply. When the word "art" is
used to specify some fragment of the useful arts, it commonly raises different notions in different
minds. It may be correctly used to designate any division of the useful arts. It is as proper to speak of
the art of grinding or the art of molding as of the art of metal-working or the art of brickmaking.
[2] A "use" is an application of a means to substance to produce an effect which may or may not be
the necessary effect of the means in its normal operation. A catalytic may be used to ignite gas or to
convert oleins into stearines. An ice pick may be used to hold a chalk line or prick holes in leather,
etc.
[3] By "natural law" in the useful arts is meant that uniformity of action which is manifested
whenever any particular substance in any particular condition is brought into such relation with any
particular manifestation of energy that the force exerted modifies or prevents modification of the
form, nature, condition, or locus of the substance or modifies the manifestation of energy or both.
[4] A "property" may be described as any quality common and essential to the whole of a class but
not necessary to mark out that class from other classes. Thus, all wheel tires may be said to possess
annularity; but washers and finger rings are also annular. A "peculiar property" is one that not only
always belongs to a class of objects but belongs to that class alone; thus a circle has the peculiar
property of containing the greatest space within a line of given length, and catalytic substances have
the power of setting up chemical reaction without themselves being changed.
[5] An "accident" is any quality that may indifferently belong or not belong to a class without
affecting the other qualities of the class. That a man's name is James is an accident telling nothing of
the man's physique or character.
[6] "Effect" or "result" is the consequence of a process of the useful arts practiced with or without
instruments. The effect of an instrument is the effect of its operation. Effects may be direct or
indirect, proximate or remote, necessary or accidental.
"Product" is an effect consequent upon a process that changes the form, state, or ingredients of matter
perceptibly and permanently, as distinguished from effects that are fleeting or involve no change in
perceptible form, state, or ingredients of matter.

"Function" is the "action of means upon an object while producing the effect." (Robinson.) Functions
may be direct or indirect, proximate or remote, necessary or accidental. The direct, proximate, or
necessary function of the hammer in normal operation is impacting. Indirect, remote, or accidental
functions of a hammer may be comminuting, forging, driving, etc.
[7] Classification of the Sciences.
[8] Logical division is the process by which the species of which a genus is composed are
distinguished and set apart. Physical division or partition is the process by which the parts of any
object are distinguished and set apart. Metaphysical division is the process by which the qualities of a
thing are segregated and set apart in thought.
[9] Any class of objects may be called a "genus" if it be regarded as made up of two or more
different kinds of objects or of two or more species. "Motors" is a genus when the class "Motors" is
considered as divided into electric motors and nonelectric motors, or electric motors, spring motors,
weight motors, current motors fluid pressure motors, etc. A genus is more extensive than any of its
species but less intensive.
A "species" is any class that is regarded as forming a part of the next larger class, "electric motors"
being a species of "motors" and "motors" being a species of "energy transformers." A species is more
intensive than the genus to which it belongs but less extensive.
Every species may be a genus to another species until no further subdivisions can be made. This last
indivisible species is termed the infima species. Every genus may be a species to another genus until
a point is reached where no further generalization may be made or the summum genus is attained. In
the Patent Office classification of the useful arts, the summum genus is useful arts. The summum
genus of the plastic arts would be plastics. The infima species in the useful arts evidently never can
be attained.
"Proximate species" and "proximate genus" indicate, respectively, those species that are divided from
a genus without intermediate genera, and those genera from which the species are directly divided.
Motors, and not energy transformers, is the proximate genus to the species, fluid motors, electric
motors, etc., while fluid motors, electric motors, etc., and not steam engines, alternating current
motors, etc., are proximate species to motors.
[10] In the Manual of Classification of the U. S. Patent Office the arrangement of subclasses has
always been alphabetical, although in the Supplement containing definitions of revised classes the
arrangement is numerical. If the latter schedule of "Balls" in the text had been printed in alphabetical
order, it is apparent that the species "Aluminum" and "Zinc" of the genus Metal would be as widely
separated as possible. In the former schedule of "Balls," in which the genus Metal is printed,
"Aluminum" and "Zinc" come together. It is apparent that in an alphabetical arrangement allied
species can not be kept together without printing every proximate genus. This fact, among others,
indicates the advisability of abandoning the alphabetical arrangement in the classification manual and
adopting the idea arrangement in the schedules of revised classes, supplemented by a consolidated
alphabetical index of all subclasses.
[11] A species contains all the qualities of the genus and more. These additional qualities form the
"difference." The electric motor has the qualities that are common to motors and is differentiated by
reason of the fact that electric energy is thereby converted to mechanical motion.
[12] Classification of a patent is said to be "original" in the class and subclass which receives the
most intensive claimed disclosure, and in which the patent is indexed in the official classification
indexes. "Original classification" is referred to as opposed to "classification by cross-reference."

A "cross-reference" is a copy of a patent placed in a subclass other than that in which the
classification is made original, in order to make available for search inventions disclosed therein and
additional to that by which the patent has been diagnosed and classified.
A "digest cross-reference" is a cross-reference formed from abstracts or extracts from a patent
consisting of illustration and text cut from a photolithograph of a patent and mounted.
A "search-card" is a sheet of the size of a photolithograph of a patent placed with the
photolithographs of patents forming a subclass in the examining division and public search room, and
containing suggestions for further search, and on the copy for the search room, a definition of the
subclass.
"Search notes" are addenda to class and subclass definitions comparing other classes and subclasses
with the one defined and giving directions for search when necessary to prosecute search beyond the
defined class or subclass.

(C) RULES OF CLASSIFICATION.
BASIS OF CLASSIFICATION.
(1) The basis of subdivision and assemblage of the means of the "useful
arts" in the Patent Office classification is "art" within the meaning of "art"
in section 4886, Revised Statutes. The direct, proximate or necessary art,
operation or effect, rather than some accidental and remote use or
application, should be selected. In all cases qualities or characteristics that
persist through all accidental uses and that can be identified as permanent
are to be preferred.
(2) The operative, instrumental, or manipulative arts, including machines,
tools, and manufacturing processes, should be classified according to
whether a single operation of one kind applicable to various materials to be
used for various purposes is carried out by the claimed means, or whether
plural operations are performed, which, combined, produce a special effect
or special product.
Example: An instrument performing a plurality of operations peculiar to shoe-manufacture would be
classified on the basis of shoemaking, because that instrument would be incapable of other use, while
an instrument peculiarly adapted to drive nails would be classified on the basis of nailing, whether
for nailing shoe-heels or other objects, and a hammer would be classified on the basis of its function
as an impact tool even though described as for driving nails, and even into shoe-heels.

(3) Structures (passive instruments) will, in general, be classified on the
basis of structure, either of special or general application, the essential
functions and effects of static structures being resistive or the maintaining
of forces in equilibrium.
Example: A structure recognized as peculiar to barriers of the kind known as fences would be
classified in the special class of Fences, but posts, joints, beams, etc., recognized as having use in
general building, even though described as used in fences, would be classified in a more general
building class, such as Wooden Buildings or Metallic Building Structures.

(4) Compositions of matter and manufactured or formed stock or materials
will be classified in accordance with the inherent character of the substance
or material where possible, otherwise according to special use.
Example: A pure chemical is expected to be classified on the basis of its chemical structure and
constituents, even though useful as a food, medicine, dyestuff, explosive, etc., and alloys on the basis
of metallic composition, even though used for bearings, coins, tools, etc.; whereas a physical

composition having no reason for existence except to function as a cleansing composition or a paint
might have to be classified on the basis of its function as a detergent or a coating composition,
respectively. Also a bimetallic layered foil, plate, or wire would be expected to be classified as metal
stock even though designed for use for dental filler, plowshare, or electric conductor, and a woven
textile fabric as a fabric even though described as used for a filter or apron for a paper-making
machine.

DIVISION AND ARRANGEMENT. p. 27

(5) The divisions or subclasses of a class should be made exhaustive, i. e.,
they should be susceptible of receiving any future invention that may fall
within the scope of the class. The rule as usually phrased is: "The
constituent species must be equal, when added together, to the genus."
Exhaustive division may be secured by maintaining always a residual or
miscellaneous subclass. The miscellaneous subclass represents the
remainder of the original undivided material undefined except as the class is
defined and may be accurately treated as if it had the class title.
(6) A second rule respecting the subdivision of a class is: "The constituent
species must exclude each other." That is, the divisions or subclasses must
not overlap. (See exception in Rule 8.)
Example: If a number of balls of several different materials, several different conformations, or
constructions, several different colors, were to be divided into glass balls, hollow balls, and red balls,
this rule would be violated, because some balls would be glass, hollow, and red.

(7) A third rule respecting subdivision is: "The divisions must be founded
on one principle or basis." The application of this rule will generally form
divisions that do not overlap. (See exception in Rule 8.)
Example: If a number of balls of several different constructions, several different materials, and
several different colors were to be classified so as to provide a place for each kind of characteristic,
they should be divided first, for example, according to construction into hollow balls and solid balls,
each of these according to materials into glass balls, rubber balls, metal balls, wooden balls, etc., and
each of the latter into red balls, blue balls, green balls, etc.

(8) When it is found that division into overlapping subclasses and on
different characteristics is a lesser evil than an unwieldy number of
subclasses that would otherwise result, then those subclasses based on
characteristics deemed more important for purposes of search should
precede in the list of subclasses those based upon characteristics deemed
less important. (See Rule 6.)

(9) In arrangement of subclasses or subdivisions the miscellaneous groups
containing material not falling within any of the specifically entitled
subclasses, should stand first; those subclasses defined by effect or special
use should precede those defined by function or general use; those
containing matter that is related to the matter of other subclasses as whole
to part should precede those subclasses that contain the part; and those
defined by a characteristic deemed more important or significant for search
purposes should precede those defined by characteristics deemed less
important.
Whenever superior rank has been assigned to any selected characteristic by
p. 28
placing divisions based upon it in advance of divisions based upon other
characteristics, this superiority should be maintained throughout.
Example: A partial schedule of Class 80 follows to illustrate the arrangement of subclasses:

Class 80.—Metal Rolling.

1. Miscellaneous. 24. Die rolling—
2. Heating and rolling. 25. Oscillating rolls.
3. Cutting and rolling. .. .....
4. Drawing and rolling Mills—
5. Annular bodies. 32. Coiling.
6. Screw threads— 33. Work reversing.
7. Concave and roll. 34. Three or more coacting rolls.
8. Platen rolling— 35. Continuous—
9. Dies. 36. Inclined trains.
10. Rods and wires. .. .....
11. Tubes— 41. Roll cooling and heating.
12. Idle rolls. 42. Cooling beds.
13. Axial rolling. 43. Feeding—
14. Segmental rolls. 44. Tables.
15. Skelping. .. .....
16. Wheels and disks. 55. Housings.
17. Reworking 56. Roll adjustments—
18. Concave and roll. 57. Relief devices.
19. Platen and roll. 58. Rolls—
20. Platen rolling— .. .....
21. Disk platens. 60. Processes—
22. Axial rolling— .. .....
23. Pattern rolls. 66. Flanged bars.

In this schedule the miscellaneous subclass is numbered 1, then follow three subclasses (2-4) of
rolling plus another function, then four major subclasses (5-16) of rolling, merely, but applied to
blanks of special form producing special products, then one special subclass (17) based upon a

special class of material treated, then five subclasses (18-31) specialized in type and mode of
operation, then general types of rolling mills (32-40), then various parts and accessories (41-59), then
processes (60-66). This is the usual arrangement and is an exhaustive division for the art of metal
rolling. Had there been miscellaneous subclasses for all combined operations of rolling plus some
other function, a miscellaneous subclass for all mere rolling machines, either special or general, and a
miscellaneous subclass for all parts and accessories, the requirements of exhaustive division would
have been also satisfied.

In the illustrative schedule, there being no miscellaneous subclass for means having combined
functions of rolling and another, any patent having claims for the combination of a means for rolling
and a means for cooling would fall in subclass 1, Miscellaneous. In that subclass would also fall all
"Mills," such as for rolling spiral conveyer-flights, the same not falling under any of the subclasses
32-40, no miscellaneous subclass of "Mills" and no special article-rolling subclass having been
provided; also all parts or accessories, such as a water-cooled screen, peculiarly adapted to rolling-
mills, there being no existing subclass of screens therein and no miscellaneous subclass of parts. The
arrangement of subclasses in Class 80 requires that the combination of a furnace and a rolling-mill
shall be placed in subclass 2, even if the combination be designed and adapted for rolling annular
bodies (subclass 5) or tubes (subclass 11). Means special to rolling a tube between a concave and roll
must be placed in subclass 13 rather than in subclass 18. A work-reversing mill must be placed p. 29 in
subclass 33 rather than in subclass 34 even though it have three or more coacting rolls.

The rolling of "Screw-threads" having been given higher rank than a "Concave and roll" mechanism,
any concave and roll mechanism limited for use in rolling screw-threads should be formed into a
subclass indented under "Screw-threads" and not into a subclass "Screw-threads" indented under
"Concave and roll."

(10) Class schedules are arranged with certain subclasses appropriately
indented according to a commonly understood expedient. In a properly
indented schedule subclasses in column at the extreme left are the main
species (the proximate species) of the class. The titles and definitions of all
subclasses proximate to the class (at extreme left) must be read with the title
and definition of the class, as if indented under the class title one space to
the right; so also with the titles and definitions of subclasses indented under
other subclasses. If a title has no number (as in Class 80, "Mills"), it
represents merely a subject-matter to be divided, assumed to have no
representatives other than those in the species indented under it. If a title
having indented species under it has a number, it not only represents a
subject to be divided but also a subclass including all other species not
falling within the indented titles. Indention does not indicate superiority or
inferiority, but merely that the title and the definition of the indented
subclass must be read with the title and definition of the subclass under
which it is indented. A title selected in a scheme of subdivision to be of first
importance and placed, therefore, in advance, should not thereafter be

indented under a title selected to be of secondary importance and, therefore,
having a lower position. (See Rule 8.)
(11) A group of material may be divided on several different bases. "Use" or
"purpose" or "object treated" may be adopted only when the "use" or
"purpose" or "object treated" stamps upon the invention such peculiarities
of operation or construction as to limit the applicability of the invention to
the use or purpose named. (See Basis of Classification, Rule 1.) A group
based upon mode of operation also may be divided into subclasses (1) with
a "functional" title, usually participial in form, and adapted therefore to
receive machines, processes, and tools; (2) with special use, purpose, or
object-treated title containing the name of the use, purpose, or object; (3)
with "type" title, usually a name or a name with a qualifying adjective; (4)
with a title of a part or subcombination, also a name.
Example: In Class 90, Gear-Cutting, Milling, and Planing, are to be found subclasses entitled "Gear-
cutting," certain machines being peculiar to that use; also other subclasses with the general functional
title "Planing," subordinate to which are the special use subclass "Planing, Soft metal," and the type
subclass "Planers" divided into two coordinate subclasses, "Reciprocating bed" and "Reciprocating
cutter," and several subordinate "part" subclasses, including "Tool-feeds" and "Tool-heads."p. 30 The
adjective form of the title "Planers, Reciprocating bed," indicates a type subclass. If the title had been
Planers, Reciprocating beds, the indication would be that the subclass was a part subclass to receive
planer beds only. In the class referred to for illustration, "Tool-feeds" and "Tool-heads" indicate
subclasses for parts and not for types of planers having tool feeds.

(12) In arranging the divisions of a class, such arrangement should be
sought as will minimize the need of cross-references. Search for any
particular matter can not always be limited to one group without such
extensive cross-referencing as would in some cases defeat the purpose of
classification. Forming the subdivisions of a class according to the total
similarities of the inventions, rather than according to some selected more
or less important characteristic, and arranging them in the correct order of
superiority and inferiority, with care to maintain throughout the schedule
the relative positional values of the several selected bases of division, will
ordinarily in a closely bonded class limit the search for any single invention
to the subclass particularly suited to receive it and some subclasses
preceding that one, excluding from the necessity of search the subclasses
succeeding.
Example: In Class 80, Metal-Rolling, it would not be expected to find any tube-rolling mill lower in
the schedule than the tube-rolling subclasses, but a tube-mill might be found higher up in "Heating
and rolling," "Drawing and rolling," etc. No concave and roll combination should be found

succeeding the subclass of "Concave and roll," but it may be found under subclasses above, such as
"Tubes, Screw-threads," etc. No rolls should be found lower than the subclass of "Rolls," but they
may be found in many subclasses above.

DEFINITION.

(13) Having some knowledge of the nature of the materials about to be
classified, a tentative definition of a class to be formed may be framed,
which may be either written down or merely carried in mind, to serve as a
tentative guide. This tentative definition must be considered as subject to
change to any extent by the fuller knowledge obtained by careful
consideration of the material. After a full knowledge of the materials to be
classified has been acquired, it will be necessary to frame a careful
definition of the class, and also of each subclass whose title does not
unequivocally indicate what is contained in it.
(14) A definition of any class should state the "qualities and circumstances
possessed by all the objects that are intended to be included in the class and
not possessed completely by any other objects." A proper definition should
not ordinarily contain the name of the thing defined. "Definitions in a
circle" are, of course, worthless. A definition should be exactly equivalent
to the species defined and should not be expressed in obscure or ambiguous
language, but should employ terms already defined or perfectly understood.
p. 31
It should not be in negative form where it can be affirmative. If the class of
objects has a peculiar property, the naming of that may serve as a definition.
If no peculiar property can be detected, the definition should name more
than one quality or property. Several different classes may have one or more
properties alike, but as the number is increased the likelihood of there being
others having the same properties is decreased. The briefest possible
statement of such properties or qualities as are possessed by all the objects
of a class and not completely possessed by any other objects, which will
suffice to distinguish the class from other classes and determine its position
in the general classification, will be most satisfactory. To define any
species, the genus having been defined, the genus should be named and the
difference added. Of course, no generic definition should contain any
limitation not characteristic of every species of the defined genus. In
seeking qualities by which to describe a genus or species, no accident
should be selected.

Example: Suppose there be marked out and defined as a genus all means whereby one form of energy
is transformed into another form of energy and no more, and the genus be named energy-
transformers. We may then name, as species, energy-transformers that are motors and energy-
transformers that are not motors. Motors may be defined by merely naming the genus energy-
transformers, and stating the difference, to wit, continuously transforming energy into cyclical
mechanical motion. Then the definition will be: Energy-transformers that are adapted to continuously
transform energy into cyclical mechanical motion. The non-motor division will retain the genus
definition.

It would not be illuminating for a searcher having little familiarity with the textile arts to look under
the title "Carding" and find that carding is defined as a means for carding fiber.

Even though the first steam-engine invented had been used to run a gristmill, the accident of its use
as a part of a gristmill would hardly warrant the definition of a steam-engine as a means to grind
corn. Nor would a hammer be properly defined as an instrument to drive nails or to crack nuts or to
forge horseshoes, even though a patent should not mention any use other than one of these and
should lay heavy emphasis on the special value of the hammer as a nut cracker, nail driver, etc.

(15) In those cases where the title is so obvious that definition is
superfluous, explanatory notes may be substituted and will usually be found
helpful.
CROSS-REFERENCES AND SEARCH-NOTES.

(16) Inasmuch as nearly every patent discloses unclaimed matter that is
classifiable separately from the claimed matter, it is clearly impossible to
cross-reference every disclosure of every means in every patent. Many
things must be taken as conventional, obvious, or well known, and the good
judgment of the classifier is bound to be exercised in cross-referencing
matter disclosed but not claimed to be the invention of the patentee.
(17) A mere part or element should rarely be cross-referenced from an
element class to a superior combination class. An element forming partp.of 32
a
combination in a superior class should, if claimed, be cross-referenced to
the element class and also if not claimed if it seems to be not merely a
conventional form, and patents having claims for more than one differently
classifiable invention should always be cross-referenced unless such an
arrangement of subclasses with search-notes is substituted as will guide the
searcher to all places where the material may be found. Claimed matter
additional to that which controls the classification, if belonging in the same
class, should be cross-referenced into a succeeding subclass. Cross-
references of unclaimed disclosure may be in either direction.

(18) To supplement or take the place of cross-referencing, more or less
elaborate search-notes are needed, giving directions and suggestions for
further search, setting out the relationship between classes and subclasses,
and drawing distinctions by example. Search-notes should indicate other
classes or subclasses in which the subject-matter of the group to which the
search-notes are appended is likely to form a part of a more intensive
combination, also analogous matter that might serve as a reference for a
broad claim. They need not, in general, indicate where parts or elements of
the subject-matter which are common also to other classes can be found,
because the index of classes contains the necessary information. For
example, it is not necessary in every machine-class to indicate by search-
notes where machine-elements and static parts may be found, nor in a class
of wooden boxes to point out where the nails, screws, hinges, or locks that
may form a part of the box are classified.
DIAGNOSIS TO DETERMINE CLASSIFICATION.

(19) Inasmuch as nearly every patent contains disclosure that is claimed and
also disclosure that is not claimed, it has been deemed advisable to establish
the general rule that where the claimed and unclaimed disclosures are
classified in different classes or subclasses the invention both disclosed and
claimed shall determine the placing of a patent (or a pending application)
rather than any selected invention that may be disclosed but not claimed.
"Not claimed" covers means that may form an element only of a claim as
well as means not referred to in any claim. (See exceptions in Rules 21 to
22 inclusive.)
Example: A patent discloses and claims a dash-pot but illustrates it in such relation to a metal-planing
machine as to utilize it for checking the movement of the bed at one end of its path, or in connection
with an electric generator to aid in effecting the brush adjustment; the patent should be classified in
the subclass of Dash-pots. If the classifier finds the disclosed organization of dash-pots and planer or
dash-pot and generator more than a conventional illustration of an obvious use, he should note a
cross-reference to Planers or Electricity, Generation. A patent discloses an internal-combustion
engine associated with a specific form of carbureter; the claims relate to the engine parts only; the
class of Internal-Combustion Engines should receive the patent, and a cross-reference should be
placed in Carbureters. A patent discloses and specifically claims the combination of a rail-joint
p. 33
comprising abutting rails, fishplates, and specific bolts; the patent goes to an appropriate class of rail-
joints, and if the bolt is more than a mere obvious conventional bolt, a cross-reference should be
noted for the appropriate subclass of Bolts.

(20) The totality of the claimed invention should be selected when possible
to determine the appropriate class in which to place a patent. The entire

expression of the invention will usually be set forth in the most relatively
intensive claim.[1] In a properly drawn patent there is at least one claim that
will serve as a mark to indicate the classification of that patent.
(21) Where a patent discloses but does not claim a combination of proper
scope to be classified in a combination subclass and claims merely a detail
classified in a subclass lower in the schedule, both in the same class, if the
subclasses are so related that the combination always involves the detail so
that a search for the detail must necessarily be made in the combination
subclass, the patent may be placed in the combination subclass. This avoids
the need of a cross reference into the combination subclass, and a lack of a
copy in the detail subclass is immaterial, as it is seen in the completion of
the search through the combination subclass. (See Rule 19.)
Example: A patent for a saw-making machine discloses dressing, jointing, and gaging mechanisms; it
claims dressing and jointing only. There is a subclass for dressing, jointing, and gaging, and a
subclass for dressing and jointing. In this case the patent may be placed in the first-mentioned
subclass, as that must be searched always when the second-mentioned one is searched, cross
referencing in this situation being of little value.

(22) Where a subclass with a generic title has indented thereunder a species
type-subclass bearing the title of the generic subclass qualified by a
difference, any patent which claims an invention falling within the genus
subclass and discloses the qualification of the species type-subclass should
be classified in the latter whether or not the entire disclosure is claimed.
(See Rule 19.)
Example:

Class 29.—Metal Working.
Machine chucks and tool sockets—
Cam closing—
126. Scroll—
127. Bevel pinion or ring.
p. 34
If a patent claimed only the scroll of a scroll-chuck, but disclosed it in connection with a bevel pinion
and ring, it should be classified in subclass 127, Bevel pinion and ring, and not in subclass 126,
Scroll, although if there were no disclosure of the bevel pinion and ring it would go in subclass 126.
Any search for scrolls must be prosecuted through all subclasses that include "Scroll" in the title.

(23) Where, as in the case of patents that show and claim a combination that
as matter of common knowledge is not new except in one of its elements, to
classify a patent strictly in accordance with rule would result in placing the

patent where it would serve no useful purpose as a reference and having to
cross-reference it to a class where it would serve a useful purpose, it is best
to classify the patent in the class to which the element would take it. (See
Rule 19.)
Example: A patent claiming a wheeled vehicle, broadly, in combination with an internal-combustion
engine comprising a cylinder, a crank-case, a piston and suitably-connected crank, a valve opening
into the crank-case, and a valve in the piston opening into the cylinder, may be advantageously
classified as an internal-combustion engine notwithstanding the alleged invention is for a motor
vehicle.

(24) In order to meet the situation respecting the classification of those
patents that indiscriminately claim an article of manufacture defined only
by the material of which it is made and those patents that claim those
materials, leaving to the specification information regarding the designed
uses, patents for articles defined only by their ingredients specifically set
forth may be placed in the composition of matter or material class. (See
Rule 19.)
Example: A patent having a claim for a cutter made of an alloy of iron, tungsten, and manganese
would be classified with Alloys; a patent claiming a box made of paper composed of two layers
united by a solution of asphaltum should go to the class of Laminated Fabric and Analogous
Manufactures, rather than to paper boxes; and a patent for a house having its exterior coated with
equal quantities by volume of carbonate of lead and oxid of barium suspended in a vehicle of linseed-
oil would be classified as a paint rather than as a house.

(25) An alleged process of utilizing a specifically-defined composition or
material which consists in merely applying it to the use it was designed for
may be classified as a composition or material rather than as a process. (See
Rule 19.)
Example: A process of painting the bottom of a marine vessel which consists in applying thereto a
composition consisting of sulphate of copper, powdered metallic zinc, chlorid of antimony, and
hyposulphite of soda, in a vehicle of linseed oil, would be more usefully classified as an antifouling
paint than as a ship, as the invention would hardly be distinguishable from a paint claimed as such
and described for use on submarine surfaces.

(26) An alleged process consisting merely in the use of a particularly-
defined machine or similar instrument operating according to its law of
action will ordinarily be classified in the class or subclass wherep. 35 the
machine belongs. But if in addition to defining the operation of a particular
machine the claim also specifies acts not performed by the machine, the

classification should be in the class or subclass in which the process
belongs. (See Rule 19.)
Example: Thus a claim for a method of rolling an iron plate which consists in passing an iron blank
between a pair of rolls arranged horizontally in juxtaposition one above the other and geared together
so as to rotate in opposite directions, and causing an idle roll supported in bearings on the roll-
housings to bear against the central portion of the surface of one of the first pair of rolls on the upper
side thereof, should be classified as a rolling-mill, while if to that claim were added the steps of
doubling the sheet after one passage between the rolls, again passing between the rolls, again
doubling, and then passing the now four-ply pack between the rolls sidewise or turned 90 per cent to
the direction in which it had previously been fed, the classification should be with processes of sheet-
metal manufacture.

(27) In the absence of settled rules defining permissible joinder of
inventions, there may be in one patent claims for one or more or all of the
classes of invention named in the statute, to wit, machine, art, manufacture,
and composition of matter. There may also be claims to several more or less
related inventions in the same statutory class of invention but each
belonging to a different industrial art. (1) Where different main classes are
involved, the patent will be classified by the most intensive invention,
without regard to the statutory class to which it belongs. (2) Where different
subclasses of the same class are involved, the patent will be classified in
that one of the several subclasses defined to receive the several inventions
which stands highest in the schedule of subclasses.
(28) Where a patent contains claims for all or a plurality less than all of the
statutory classes, the general rule of preference or superiority of the several
classes of subclasses is that represented by the following order, to wit: (1)
Machine (or other operative instrument); (2) Art; (3) Manufacture; (4)
Composition of matter. This order is, in a general way, the order of
intensiveness of the several kinds of invention. (See Rules 29-35.)
Example: An automatic screw-machine, peculiarly adapted to carry out a process of making a novel
form of machine-screw out of a new iron alloy, and having a claim to the machine, to the process, to
the screw, and to the alloy, would be assigned to Metal-Working, Combined machines, and, if all
claims were allowed, cross-referenced to Bolt and rivet-making processes, to Bolts, and to Alloys. If
the claim to any one or two of the subjects were eliminated, the order of preference or superiority and
the order of cross-referencing would remain the same.

(29) Patents containing a plurality of claims for several different statutory
kinds of invention that are classifiable in different main classes, and
wherein the rule of relative intensiveness varies from the order Machine,

Art, Manufacture, and Composition of matter, may be diagnosed and
classified as directed in the following paragraphs (30 to 35).
p. 36
(30) Where a patent contains claims for a process and for an apparatus
susceptible of use as an instrument in carrying out the process, but not
peculiar to that use, or for an apparatus adapted to carry out but one step or
only a part of the process, the process claim, being in this instance the more
intensive, would control the classification. (See Rule 28.)
Example: In a patent containing a claim for a process of roasting ore and then collecting the fumes,
and another claim for a roasting furnace that is a mere material-heating furnace, the process claim
would control; whereas, if one claim were for a method of roasting ores consisting of stirring the ore,
applying heat to the same, and collecting the solids from the fumes, and the other claim, were for a
heating furnace having a stirrer and a fume arrester, the apparatus claim would control. And if a
patent contained claims for a process of roasting ores, and other claims for a furnace susceptible of
use in carrying out the process but equally useful in annealing glass or steel articles, the process
claim would control.

(31) Where a patent claims a specified article of manufacture or other
product, and also an instrument for making a part only of that specified
article or other product, the product claim, being more intensive, should
control the classification; so also in case of a claim for a product and a
claim for an instrument performing any minor act with respect thereto. (See
Rule 28.)
Example: Where a patent claims a particular construction of a riveted joint, and also a tool for
calking the rivet, and where a patent claims a particular construction of shoe, and also a buttonhook
for buttoning said shoe, the article and not the tool claims control.

(32) Where a patent contains claims to a process and a product, the process
claims govern the classification in those cases where search among
machines for making the product would have to be made, and such
processes would be classifiable on the basis of the mode of operation,
usually in the same class with machines for practicing such processes. (See
Rule 28.)
Example: A patent having a claim for a process of making bifocal lenses, consisting in grinding the
surface of one piece of glass to form a convex lens, heating another piece of glass until it is plastic,
then forcing the ground surface of the first-named piece into the body of the latter and gradually
cooling the lens-blank thus formed; and also a claim for a bifocal lens composed of two pieces of
glass weld-united, would be classified in Glass-manufacture and cross-referenced into lenses. Or a
patent having a claim to a process of making a metal plate with elongated perforations, consisting in
forming round perforations in the plate and subsequently rolling the plate, thereby thinning and

elongating the plate and elongating the openings, and also a claim to a metallic plate having
relatively long and narrow perforations, would be classified on the basis of the process claim.

(33) Where a patent claims both process and product, and the alleged
process is disclosed in the product, so that search would have to be made in
the appropriate class of products, the product will be adopted as the basis of
classification, and classification will be in the appropriate product class.
(See Rule 28.)
p. 37 a
Example: A claim for a process of making a pencil consisting in assembling a core of graphite with
sheathing of wood, and attaching a cap of rubber-composition to one end, would be classified as a
pencil rather than as a process, became conception of the article is inseparable from the process and
search must be made in the article class.

(34) Where a patent claims a process of making a composition of matter,
and also the composition of matter, the claims will be classified in general
in accordance with the classification of the composition of matter in all
cases where the process is peculiarly adapted to produce the composition,
as by setting forth the introduction or assemblage of particular ingredients,
since those processes that include the selection of particular ingredients
necessitate search among compositions having such ingredients. (See Rule
28.)
Example: A patent having a claim for a composition consisting of a mixture of caoutchouc and
casein, and a claim for the process of preparing a rubberlike substance which consists in adding
undissolved raw caoutchouc to casein and thoroughly mixing and kneading the mass, would be
classified according to the composition.

(35) Where a patent claims a product such as a specific article of
manufacture, or a specific composition of matter, and also claims a process
of general application for making one of the parts of the article or one of the
ingredients of the composition, the product claim should control the
classification. (See Rule 28.)
Example: If a patent claimed a woven textile fabric having the yarns interlaced in a defined relation,
and a process of spinning a yarn utilized in the fabric; or if a patent claimed a varnish composed of
shellac, dissolved in wood alcohol, and a pigment, and also contained a claim for distilling wood to
obtain the alcohol, the product claim would control the classification in each instance, and the
process would be cross-referenced.

[1] All terms have a meaning in extension and in intension. The meaning of a term in extension
consists of the objects to which the term may be applied; its meaning in intension consists of the
qualities necessarily possessed by objects bearing that name. The term "motors" in extension means
all motors—electric, gas, water, spring, weight, etc. "Motors" in intension means instruments to
convert some form or manifestation of energy into periodical or cyclical motion of a body. As the
intension increases the extension decreases, and vice versa. There must be more motors than there are
electric motors, and electric motors have more qualifications than are common to all motors.
Comparison of arts and instruments with respect to their extension and intension for classification
purposes should be made between comparable qualities. A claim for a steam-engine may be very
specific while a claim for a reaper may be very broad; here there is no comparable relationship, and
the terms intensive and extensive do not have the relative significance most useful in classification.
But when a patent or application contains claims for mechanism peculiar to electric motors and other
claims for mechanism common to electric motors and other kinds of motors, the claims for the
electric motor would control the classification.

(D) PROCEDURE IN RECLASSIFYING WITHIN
EXAMINING DIVISIONS.
(1) Do not start to make a new class or revise an old one with preconceived
fixed notions respecting its scope and the particular subdivisions required.
Wait until all patents pertinent to the subject have been seen and adequate
knowledge of them acquired. In other words, make no a priori classification
but discover and assemble all the facts and from them make your
inductions. Then the common characteristics of the subject-matter of the
class may be intelligently defined, the limitations of the class marked out,
and its relation to other classes set forth. Bear in mind that the Patent Office
classification deals with the subject-matter of the useful arts rather than
merely with existing classes, and that it is not therefore essential to retain
classes that are found to be composed of unrelated or too distantly related
units.
Assuming that the work of reclassification is undertaken by examiners p.who
38

are already experienced in the subject-matter to be classified, procedure as
follows is recommended:
(2) Utilizing your previously acquired knowledge of the patents in the class
you are about to revise, subdivide the existing subclasses into bundles, so as
to assemble in each bundle those patents deemed to have the closest
resemblance to each other. For the purpose of this assemblage, consider
each patent as an entirety and not with reference to various more or less
important parts of that entirety.
Example: An apparatus comprising in alleged combination a means for decanting water, a means for
electrolytically depositing impurities, and a means for filtering the water, should not be classified
either as a decanter, an electrolytic apparatus, or a filter, but should be classified as a combination
apparatus (taking it to the general art of liquid purification). So also the combination of a rotary
printing-press with a folding mechanism, and a wrapping mechanism, should not be classified merely
as a rotary printing-press, a folding machine, or a wrapping machine, but should be classified as a
combination of the several mechanisms as an entirety whose functions carried out in proper order
produce a printed and wrapped newspaper.

(3) Write an approximate or tentative definition of the matter thus
assembled in each bundle and attach it to its appropriate bundle.

(4) Where it appears that the subject matter of any bundle formed from the
patents of any subclass is analogous to matter in other subclasses of the
same class or in other classes, a note should be added to that effect so that
this matter may be given special consideration.
(5) When the same examiner or different examiners are working on
different subclasses containing analogous matter, parallel lines of
subdivision should be followed wherever possible, in order to effect an
arrangement that will facilitate comparisons.
(6) When subdividing a group of more or less complex organized structures
or mechanisms, note should be taken of subcombinations that form or it is
thought should form the basis of other subclasses, either in the same or
different classes, into which those details may be collected, either classified
therein originally or by cross-reference.
Example: Assuming that the combination of press, folder, and wrapping mechanism, referred to in a
preceding paragraph is to be classified in a class of Printing, on the entirety as a combination having
the function of printing, plus other functions, and that folding and also wrapping are separately
classified, then the particular type of press should be selected to be cross-referenced into a press-type
subclass of the class of Printing, such as "Presses, rotary," while the folding mechanism and the
wrapping mechanism would be noted for cross-reference to other appropriate classes. Also, any part
of the printing press, such as the inking mechanism, specifically described, should be noted for cross-
reference into a subclass of Printing designed to receive the inking mechanism as a part of the
printing press.

(7) After a knowledge of the material of the class has been obtained by
p. 39
estimating the resemblances between the individual patents that have been
assembled in the several groups, comparison of these groups, represented
by the bundles of photolithographs, by the aid of the approximate
definitions and notes attached can be made. It can then be decided whether
all of these groups are to be retained in the proposed class, and the retained
groups can be organized into a class with the subclasses arranged so as to
bring those subclasses having the strongest resemblances in closest relation,
and in such order as to comply with the conventions adopted in the official
classification. It will probably be necessary to have one subclass or group as
broad as the definition of the class, to take unclassifiable matter and to
provide for possible future inventions.
(8) Up to this point, more or less cursory attention may be given individual
patents; but when an arrangement of subclasses shall have been tentatively

adopted it will be necessary to consider each patent carefully to ascertain
whether it is properly placed.
(9) Patents that, considered as an entirety, cover means not peculiar to the
class or subject-matter being revised, should, in general, when assembled in
groups as indicated, have a note attached indicating not only want of
limitation to the subject-matter of the class but also a more appropriate class
to receive them if such there be. Although a very large proportion of patents
can be accurately classified as indicated by their titles and stated uses, the
mere fact that in a patent found in a class the invention is called in the
specification or claims by a name peculiar to the class is not of itself a
reason for considering it peculiar to the class. A gas and liquid contact
apparatus may be called a heater, a cooler, a gas-washer, a water-carbonator,
a condenser, a disinfecter, an air-moistener, and so on, depending upon
accident of use. If there are not elements in some claim to confine the
means described distinctively to what it is called, or if there are no
functions necessarily implied in the means claimed peculiar to the named
use, the patent should not be kept in the class unless there is no other class
in the office that can receive it.
Example: Where the matter claimed is a metal beam of peculiar cross-section, it should be classified
with other metal beams, as in Class 189, Metallic Building Structures, even if it is named in the
application as a beam of particular use, as a railroad-tie, car-sill, bridge-tie, etc. Should a mere dash-
pot be found classified in Class 171, Electricity, Generation, a note should be attached indicating that
it belongs in the appropriate element class.

(10) In giving this final careful attention to the patents, each should also be
scanned to see whether it contains matter that should be cross-referenced. A
few lines obscurely located in a specification may contain a disclosure of a
most valuable invention. No class can be deemed complete until the
disclosures appropriate to it found as parts of more complex inventions in
other classes, or disclosures of analogous matter in other classes, are either
cross-referenced into it or cross search-notes made.
(11) To indicate cross-references, from one subclass to another withinp. 40the
class or from the class under consideration into another class, attach a small
slip of paper to the patent and mark on the slip the subclass number in
which the cross-reference shall be mounted. If the matter to be cross-
referenced relates only to a portion of a voluminous patent, the portion of
the specification and drawing to be cross-referenced should be indicated. If

the cross-reference falls outside the class, the class number should be noted
in addition to the subclass number.
(12) Should it be found that the handling of copies in making examinations
detaches the cross-reference slips, it may be advisable to mark lightly but
legibly in pencil on the lower right-hand corner of the examiner's
photolithograph the number of the subclass or subclasses into which it is to
be cross-referenced, or the number of the class and subclass in case it is to
be cross-referenced to another class.
(13) Whether cross-reference notations are written on a separate slip or on
the photolithograph, the number of the class and subclass into which a
patent is to be cross-referenced should always be preceded by X (thus X
101-23) in order to distinguish the original classification notation from the
cross-reference notation and enable sorting and indexing to be done without
confusion.
(14) To indicate cross-references from other classes into the one being
reclassified, set down the number of the patent in a notebook, placing after
the number (1) the class and subclass in which it is classified; and (2) the
number of the class and subclass in which it is to be cross-referenced.
(15) Should new subclasses be formed or transfers of patents be determined
on, and lists of the patents, instead of copies thereof, be furnished clerks for
the purpose of making such subclasses and transfers and correcting the
official indexes and other records, each patent should be listed by number in
column to the left of a sheet of paper or notebook, and opposite each patent
number on the same sheet should be written (1) the number of the class and
subclass in which it is officially classified; (2) the number of the class and
subclass to which it is intended to transfer it; and (3) the numbers of the
classes and subclasses, preceded by X, into which it is intended to cross-
reference it.
Note: Even though examiners engaged in reclassifying are confident of their ability to classify and
arrange on better principles than those that have been applied thus far in the classification, they
ought, nevertheless, to follow those principles under which one-half of the patents have been
classified. Until the Commissioner of Patents orders examiners to classify on other principles, it is
expected they will follow those now established.

Transcriber’s Note
Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as possible,
including obsolete and variant spellings and other inconsistencies.
For readability, the footnotes have been moved to the end of the relevant
chapter.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE
CLASSIFICATION OF PATENTS ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.