restriction 翻译成"限制"即可. Election/Restriction Requirements经常是因为Examiner认为专利申请中包含多项发明,所以要求申请人选择其中之一来继续申请过程. 详细请看以下英文解释.
Election/Restriction Requirements
The patent office tends to issue restriction requirements whenever the pending claims within a given application address multiple subject matters. The restrictions follow naturally from the rule providing for a one-to-one correspondence between an invention and a patent. 35 USC § 101.
The USPTO is far stricter about restriction requirements than they used to be. For what it's worth, this occurrence appears to have resulted from the bonus system used at the patent office. Examiners currently get points for each patent application that the examiner "finally disposes". The more points, the larger the bonus. Since applications with lots of claims are harder to examine, it only makes sense that the patent examiners are quick to issue restriction requirements that quickly cut such applications down to size.
It is extremely difficult to successfully challenge a restriction requirement. The restriction is proper as between two claims if it is at all possible to practice the subject matter of either claim without practicing the subject matter of the other. The details of how the patent office goes about issuing restriction requirements, as well as some useful examples, are set forth in MPEP § 800 et seq.
There is only one proper response to a restriction requirement. The applicant must elect one of the Groups for prosecution, and the applicant must also state whether the election is being made with or without traverse. Election with traverse means that the applicant disagrees with the propriety of the restriction, and election without traverse means that the applicant agrees with the propriety of the restriction. The former must be supported by argument, and is just a waste of time. The examiner almost always prevails, so that all the patent attorney does by traversing a restriction requirement is waste the client's money. The applicant must also either cancel or withdraw the non-elected claims. Withdrawing usually makes sense. There can be difficulties in filing continuations to further prosecute the other groups if one had previously abandoned the non-elected claims. Note that failure to properly respond to the restriction requirement will result in the application going abandoned!
温馨提示：答案为网友推荐，仅供参考