Editing MPEP 2172

<noinclude>{{MPEP Section|2171|2100|2173 }}</noinclude>

==[[MPEP 2172|2172 Subject Matter Which Applicants Regard as Their Invention]]==

<noinclude><div class="noautonum">__TOC__</div></noinclude>
======I. FOCUS FOR EXAMINATION======

A rejection based on the failure to satisfy this 
requirement is appropriate only where applicant has 
stated, somewhere other than in the application as 
filed, that the invention is something different from 
what is defined by the claims. In other words, the 
invention set forth in the claims must be presumed, in 
the absence of evidence to the contrary, to be that 
which applicants regard as their invention.

======II. EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY======

Evidence that shows that a claim does not correspond 
in scope with that which applicant regards as 
applicant's invention may be found, for example, in 
contentions or admissions contained in briefs or 
remarks filed by applicant, or in affidavits filed under 37 CFR 
1.132. The content of applicant's specification 
is not used as evidence that the scope of the claims is 
inconsistent with the subject matter which applicants 
regard as their invention. Agreement, or lack thereof, between the claims and the specification is properly considered only with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph; it is irrelevant to compliance with the second paragraph of that section.

======III. SHIFT IN CLAIMS PERMITTED======

The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 does not 
prohibit applicants from changing what they regard as 
their invention during the pendency of the application. The fact that claims in a continuation 
application were directed to originally-disclosed subject 
matter which applicants had not regarded as part 
of their invention when the parent application was 
filed does not prevent the continuation application 
from receiving benefits of the filing date of the 
parent application under 35 U.S.C. 120.

2172.01Unclaimed Essential Matter[R-1]

A claim which omits matter disclosed to be essential to the invention as described in the specification or in other statements of record may be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as not enabling. Such essential matter may include missing elements, steps or necessary structural cooperative relationships of elements described by the applicant(s) as necessary to practice the invention.

In addition, a claim which fails to interrelate essential elements of the invention as defined by applicant(s) in the specification may be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, for failure to point out 
and distinctly claim the invention.
<noinclude>{{MPEP Section|2171|2100|2173 }}</noinclude>