In interpreting claims and determining the scope of protection of claims, it may be presumed that the scope of protection defined by the independent claims is different from that of their dependent claims. If the determinant attribute of the technical term asserted by the party with respect to the independent claim actually appears in the dependent claim, it may be presumed that the meaning of the technical term in the independent claim shall include, but is not limited to, the meaning qualified by the dependent claim with respect thereto.

In understanding the scope of patent protection, the scope of protection of the claims should be comprehensively understood according to the records of the claims, combined with the understanding of the claims by technicians in the field after reading the specification and drawings, combined with the invention background, invention purpose, technical problems solved, specific technical means and technical effects brought by the patent in question, and further combined with the basic common knowledge in the field.

The meaning of terms in the claims shall be understood and objectively determined from the perspective of those skilled in the art, on the basis of the technical scheme defined by the claims, relying on the full text of the specification, combined with the technical field to which the scheme falls in, the technical problems solved and the technical effects achieved, therefore ensuring that the understanding of the terms already present in the claims is not separated from the invention itself.

If the claims contain technical terms that are not conventional in the art, resulting in the technical personnel in the art unable to understand the specific meaning of the technical terms, the meaning of the technical terms may be interpreted with the contents recorded in the specification based on the principle of "internal evidence takes precedence".

In the procedure of patent right verification, even if the meaning of the relevant technical characteristics of the claim is definite, it may be necessary to introduce the specification to interpret the claims, so as to explicitly divide the boundary of the claims and match it with the true technical contribution of the patentee.