Is the terminology "Or" acceptable in patent claims?

The terminology "or" is acceptable in patent claims primarily because it effectively expresses alternative embodiments. This allows a patentee to encompass multiple variations or options within a single claim, which can be crucial for protecting the broad scope of the invention. When "or" is used, it signifies that either one of the specified elements may be present, thereby offering flexibility in interpretation and protecting a range of possible implementations of the claimed invention.

For example, if a claim states "a device comprising A or B," it indicates that the device may include either structure A or structure B, or potentially both, depending on how the claim is interpreted. This is beneficial in ensuring that the claim captures the invention's full potential and does not inadvertently limit its scope by suggesting that only one option is valid.

Moreover, using "or" can foster clarity in patent documentation, as long as the context is clear. This aligns with the fundamental principle in patent law that seeks to provide a complete and thorough description of the invention while avoiding ambiguity in the protected claims.