Abrégé du contenu technique de l’invention

22:45 Dec 28, 2009 

Comme on peut le voir sur ce lien http://fr.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?... l'abrégé est bien en première page, avant la description.

Le même brevet FR dont la première page a été traduite pour demande PCT : http://fr.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?...

Grâce à vos indications, Helen, sur l'emplacement de la page concernée et la numérotation des pages, il est clair que Abstract est la bonne traduction :-)

17:20 Dec 28, 2009 

in an application as filed. So its presence on a separate page is a clear sign that this is the Abstract. I still think it should be after the claims.

16:52 Dec 28, 2009 

Thank you everyone for your comments and discussion so far - it has been very helpful. @Bruce re wrong place, this abrégé page has been separated from the rest of the text by a page-break and the numbering of the next page has been reset to 1. The new page 1 repeats the title of the invention and what follows seems to be the detailed description of the invention, even though it is not labelled as such.

16:18 Dec 28, 2009 

... and cmwilliams is right that "Abstract" and "Abrégé" are corresponding terms. It's presence and location in the patent and its length are set by law, regulation and treaty. US Title 37 Code of Federal Regulation 1.72(b) limits the length to 150 words and says it must start "on a separate sheet, preferably following the claims, under the heading “Abstract” or “Abstract of the Disclosure.”"

Note that Title 37 CFR 1.73 requires a section titled "Brief Summary of the Invention" as part of the specification.

Now, for the French Code de la propriété intellectuelle, Partie réglementaire. Article R. 612-3 says a patent application must include four parts, and the third is "3° Un abrégé du contenu technique de l'invention ;" This is distinct from the description (1°) and claims (2°).

I conclude that the correct line up of the required parts means that the translation of this phrase is the single word "Abstract" or the phrase "Abstract of the Disclosure". I am changing my peer comments below.

However, I still think it's in the wrong place.

14:45 Dec 28, 2009 

I can't say I agree with Bruce: a quick trawl through half a dozen US patents at random reveals that "abstract" is the expression of choice.

13:37 Dec 28, 2009 

I agree with Helen. This is a Pro question because of the need for subject matter knowledge. Strict linguistic knowledge will lead one to suggest "Abstract" but that is not correct.

"Targeting" is not relevant because people reading the question should recognize the need for subject matter knowledge before they choose to answer.

13:25 Dec 28, 2009 

in that case, it should have been a "targeted" question!

13:12 Dec 28, 2009 

I would like to add that I consider this question as 'pro' level because I am not looking for a translation that any bilingual person could provide. I am hoping for input from professionals who have expertise in French and English patents to help in my decision on whether or not to translate the phrase word for word.