In May 2026, a U.S. Federal District Court completely invalidated a patent held by the American company Enviro Tech, which protected a unique poultry processing technology. The company lost everything. And no, it wasn’t because the technology turned out to be plagiarized, nor because it didn’t work.

The patent was destroyed by a single word — “about.”

The company’s lawyers used it in the patent text a whopping 241 times but forgot to explain what it meant. This court case became the loudest warning for business founders worldwide: in patent law, every vague word is a weapon that competitors will definitely use against you.

How the Word “About” Became a Patent Killer

Enviro Tech’s technology allowed for increasing the weight of chickens during processing through the use of a special acid. The patent stated that the pH level should be “from about 7.6 to about 10.”

To any engineer or chemist, the word “about” sounds completely normal — it’s a standard technological tolerance. But patents aren’t read by engineers. They are read by competitors’ lawyers looking for a loophole to grab onto.

A rival company, Safe Food, found this loophole. They argued in court: “Wait a minute, how much is ‘about 7.6’? 7.5? Is 7.0 still ‘about’ or not anymore? Where is the clear boundary?”. Since there was no numerical clarification of the limits for this “about” within the patent itself, the court declared the patent invalid due to indefiniteness of the claims.

The Founder’s Trap: Who Are You Writing the Patent For?

Most founders make the exact same fatal mistake. They think a patent is written for the patent examiner. They want to make the phrasing as broad as possible to “breeze through” registration, and they completely trust the process to a lawyer.

This is a dangerous illusion. A patent is not written for the examiner. It is written for the lawyer of your future competitor who will want to destroy this patent.

• The examiner is trying to understand your invention.

• The competitor’s lawyer is trying to kill it.

These are entirely different audiences and completely different stakes.

Any qualitative or relative adjectives are ticking time bombs. They should only be used if there is a clear mathematical explanation within the patent text. For example: “By ‘about 7.6’, we mean a range of $7.6 \pm 0.3$.” If this is missing, you are handing your business over to competitors with your own hands.

Key Takeaway

Patent law does not forgive optimism and flexibility. The desire to make a patent “stretchy” in order to protect everything under the sun often leads to it bursting in court like a soap bubble. Be precise down to the last decimal place.

Founder of Research & Patent group Intectica, author of patent algorithms for solving problems in the pharmaceutical industry, patent attorney certified in all intellectual property objects (Patents, Design, TM), with education in chemistry and law, chief expert of the patent institution of Ukraine UKRPATENT (1997-2004). Member of international organizations, including ECTA, PTMG, UAM, lecturer and blogger.