{"id":1382,"date":"2026-09-27T19:31:03","date_gmt":"2026-09-27T19:31:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/?p=1382"},"modified":"2026-09-27T19:31:49","modified_gmt":"2026-09-27T19:31:49","slug":"how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/","title":{"rendered":"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cPlurality\u201d is one of the most common words in patent claims. German claims say \u201cVielzahl\u201d, Japanese claims \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d (<em>fukus\u016b<\/em>). Yet infringement proceedings keep returning to the same question: how many elements make a plurality? Are two enough, must there be more than two, or does the word even imply a \u201clarge number\u201d? We have reviewed the case law in Germany, before the Unified Patent Court (UPC), at the European Patent Office (EPO), in the United States and in Japan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"538\" src=\"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-1024x538.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1381\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-1024x538.png 1024w, https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-300x158.png 300w, https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-768x403.png 768w, https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-1536x806.png 1536w, https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x-2048x1075.png 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The short answer:<\/strong> As far as we can see, \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d mean <strong>\u201cat least two\u201d<\/strong> in every jurisdiction reviewed. That is \u201cmore than one\u201d, not \u201cmore than two\u201d, and certainly not \u201cmany\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deviating readings do occur, mostly as a defence argument. They have required at least three, or even more than three, elements. None of them prevailed in the decisions we reviewed. The term is still treacherous elsewhere: in lists, in the relationship between singular and plural, and in translation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">I. The starting point: \u201cVielzahl\u201d is linguistically ambiguous<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In everyday German, \u201cVielzahl\u201d suggests a large quantity. Someone who speaks of a \u201cVielzahl von Beschwerden\u201d (a multitude of complaints) rarely means exactly two. The English \u201cplurality\u201d is more sober and initially denotes nothing more than the state of being plural. The Japanese \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d is the grammatical counterpart of \u201c\u5358\u6570\u201d (singular) and means \u201ctwo or more\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Claim construction, however, does not turn on everyday usage. What matters is how the skilled person understands the term against the background of the patent specification. The question is therefore whether courts treat \u201cplurality\u201d as a term of art in patent language, and whether they have ever arrived at a minimum number other than two.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">II. Germany<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1. Principles<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">According to settled case law of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), a patent claim is to be construed from the perspective of the skilled person. The description and drawings must be taken into account, and the patent specification may serve as its \u201cown dictionary\u201d. A term can therefore have a meaning in the patent that differs from ordinary usage. This also applies to terms of quantity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2. Case law on \u201cVielzahl\u201d<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The D\u00fcsseldorf patent chambers regularly construe \u201cVielzahl\u201d as \u201cat least two\u201d without much discussion:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court, judgment of 12 December 2018 \u2013 4b O 15\/17:<\/strong> The claim concerned a \u201cmultiple decoding step\u201d using a \u201cVielzahl von Dekodierungsverfahren\u201d (plurality of decoding methods). The chamber held that \u201cmultiple\u201d or \u201cplurality\u201d means \u201cat least two\u201d in this context. Two different decoding methods in the standard at issue were sufficient.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court, judgment of 24 April 2012 \u2013 4b O 274\/10:<\/strong> According to this decision, a \u201cVielzahl von Nutzerklassen\u201d (plurality of user classes) requires a network in which \u201cseveral\u201d, i.e. at least two, user classes are distinguished.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court, judgment of 8 August 2019 \u2013 4c O 88\/17:<\/strong> A \u201cVielzahl von Probenverarbeitungs-Modulen\u201d (plurality of sample processing modules) requires at least two modules. The chamber also derived this from the function: the claimed coordination only makes sense where there are several modules.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">What is missing is also telling. In numerous other infringement cases the claim contained a \u201cVielzahl\u201d without the parties raising the term at all. Examples are D\u00fcsseldorf Higher Regional Court, 2 U 72\/23 (\u201cplurality of cutting edges\u201d), and D\u00fcsseldorf Higher Regional Court, 2 U 138\/22 (\u201cplurality of \u2026 dispensing mechanisms\u201d). We found no published decision in which a German court considered \u201cVielzahl\u201d unclear or required a minimum of more than two.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3. The reverse case: the plural as a generic term<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Germany, the deviation tends to go in the opposite direction. The <strong>Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court (judgment of 28 February 2024 \u2013 6 U 161\/22, \u201cMagnetsteuerventil\u201d)<\/strong> held that a plural used in a claim (\u201cverbindende Wasserleitungen\u201d, connecting water lines) can be understood as a generic designation. In that case a <em>single<\/em> element suffices. This applies at least where the patent as a whole does not show that at least two must be present.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For \u201cVielzahl\u201d this argument is considerably harder to make. Unlike a mere plural, the word expressly denotes a number. The decision nevertheless shows that German courts always read quantities in the context of the patent specification and not purely grammatically.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">III. Unified Patent Court<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The UPC construes claims according to the principles set out by the Court of Appeal in <em>NanoString v 10x Genomics<\/em> (order of 26 February 2024). The claim is the decisive basis, and the description and drawings must always be used as explanatory aids. The first decisions on terms of quantity are now available:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Local Division D\u00fcsseldorf, decision of 10 October 2024 \u2013 UPC_CFI_363\/2023 (Seoul Viosys v expert):<\/strong> The claim required \u201cmesa-etched regions\u201d in the plural. The division held that this means at least two such regions.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Local Division Milan, decision of 21 April 2026 \u2013 UPC_CFI_472\/2024 et al. (Dainese v Alpinestars):<\/strong> The defendants argued that the claim did not require a \u201cplurality of housings\u201d. Elsewhere it referred to \u201cone or more inner housings\u201d, they said, and this contradiction made the (amended) claim unclear. The division disagreed. The skilled person would recognise that a plurality of housings is necessary for the invention to work, and all figures showed this structure. The patent was upheld and infringement was found.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Milan case illustrates a typical risk. Using both \u201cone or more\u201d and \u201cplurality\u201d for the same element creates a point of attack. The courts resolve such tensions functionally, but not necessarily in the patentee\u2019s favour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">IV. European Patent Office and United Kingdom<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Following the Enlarged Board of Appeal\u2019s decision <strong>G 1\/24<\/strong> (18 June 2025), the description and drawings must always be consulted when interpreting the claims, including when assessing patentability. The EPO has thereby moved closer to the UPC standard. For \u201cplurality\u201d this means that the EPO, too, reads the term in the light of the description. The description can therefore also define it with binding effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We found no Board of Appeal decision giving \u201cplurality\u201d a meaning other than \u201cat least two\u201d or objecting to the term as unclear under Art. 84 EPC. The same applies to the courts of England and Wales. They construe claims purposively and apply the equivalents approach of <em>Actavis v Eli Lilly<\/em> (UKSC 2017). Neither principle gives any reason to read in a \u201clarge number\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">V. United States<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The position is clearest in the US, because the Federal Circuit has construed the term expressly on several occasions. This is also where the most striking examples of deviating readings can be found.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1. \u201cPlurality\u201d means \u201cat least two\u201d<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong><em>York Products v. Central Tractor Farm &amp; Family Center<\/em>, 99 F.3d 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1996):<\/strong> The district court had construed \u201cplurality\u201d as <em>more than three<\/em> gaps or pockets on each sidewall. The Federal Circuit reversed. The term means simply \u201cthe state of being plural\u201d and therefore requires only at least two ridge members on each sidewall.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong><em>Dayco Products v. Total Containment<\/em>, 258 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2001):<\/strong> The defendant argued that \u201cplurality\u201d required three or more projections. The court held instead that \u201cplurality\u201d, when used in a claim, refers to two or more items, \u201cabsent some indication to the contrary\u201d.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong><em>Callpod v. GN Netcom<\/em> (N.D. Ill., 6 March 2009):<\/strong> The defendants argued that a \u201cplurality of participants\u201d in a conference call required at least three participants, because a conference presupposes more than two people. The court rejected this and held to \u201cmore than one\u201d.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The phrase \u201cabsent some indication to the contrary\u201d matters. In the US, too, \u201cat least two\u201d is only the default meaning. A different definition in the description or an unambiguous context may lead to another result.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2. Where \u201cplurality\u201d really does work differently<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Lists \u2013 <em>SIMO Holdings v. Hong Kong uCloudlink<\/em>, 983 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2021):<\/strong> The claim required \u201ca plurality of memory, processors, programs, communication circuitry, authentication data \u2026 and non-local calls database\u201d. The Federal Circuit applied \u201ca plurality of\u201d to <em>each<\/em> item in the list, so that at least two of every item had to be present. Because the accused product lacked two databases, infringement was denied and a jury verdict of around USD 8 million was reversed. This is the most consequential \u201cdifferent meaning\u201d of \u201cplurality\u201d in practice, although it concerns the reach of the term rather than the minimum number.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Parts of a whole \u2013 <em>August Technology v. Camtek<\/em> (Fed. Cir. 2011):<\/strong> A \u201cplurality of wafers\u201d cannot be satisfied by counting sections of a single wafer as several wafers. The claim deliberately distinguished between \u201cwafer\u201d and \u201cwafers\u201d.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>A plural is not \u201cone or more\u201d \u2013 <em>Apple v. MPH Technologies<\/em> (Fed. Cir., 9 March 2022):<\/strong> Apple sought to read the plural \u201cinformation fields\u201d as \u201cone or more\u201d. The Federal Circuit required more than one field.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3. The counterpart: the indefinite article<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Conversely, under US law the indefinite article \u201ca\u201d in open (\u201ccomprising\u201d) claims generally means \u201cone or more\u201d (<em>KCJ Corp. v. Kinetic Concepts<\/em>, 2000). In <em>Salazar v. AT&amp;T Mobility<\/em> (Fed. Cir., 5 April 2023), the Federal Circuit confirmed this rule but refined it. Where several functions are assigned to \u201csaid microprocessor\u201d, at least <em>one<\/em> microprocessor must be capable of performing all of them. Spreading the functions across different processors is not enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">VI. Japan<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under Art. 70(1) of the Japanese Patent Act, the technical scope of a patented invention is determined by the claims. Under Art. 70(2), the meaning of claim terms is to be interpreted in the light of the description and drawings. The courts also take into account the prosecution history, the prior art and common general knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d means \u201ctwo or more\u201d, both linguistically and in patent practice. Japanese commentators regard the term as unproblematic for precisely this reason: writing \u201c\u8907\u6570\u306e\u201d covers every case from two upwards, leaving no room for dispute. We found no published decision in which a Japanese court gave \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d a different meaning. This is subject to the caveat that the Japanese case-law database was only partly searchable for us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Indefinite quantity words are a different matter. The Japan Patent Office documents decisions in which expressions such as \u201c\u308f\u305a\u304b\u306b\u201d (slightly) or \u201c\u9069\u5ea6\u306b\u201d (moderately) were held unclear where the description provided no yardstick. Practitioners therefore advise using the neutral \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d rather than the evaluative \u201c\u591a\u6570\u201d (many, a large number).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The real risk in Japan lies in translation. Japanese nouns have no grammatical number. Without an additional marker, the Japanese text barely reveals whether an English claim said \u201ca tank\u201d or \u201ctanks\u201d. \u201cOne or more\u201d or \u201cat least one\u201d should therefore be rendered expressly as \u201c1\u3064\u4ee5\u4e0a\u306e\u201d or \u201c\u5c11\u306a\u304f\u3068\u30821\u3064\u306e\u201d, and \u201ca plurality of\u201d as \u201c\u8907\u6570\u306e\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>A note on China:<\/em> How seriously questions of number are taken in Asia is shown by a decision of the Supreme People\u2019s Court of 13 November 2014 ((2014) Min Ti Zi No. 497, <em>Free Motion Fitness<\/em>). There, the express singular \u201cone cable\u201d was limited to exactly one cable despite the open wording of the claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">VII. Overview<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Jurisdiction<\/th><th>Default meaning<\/th><th>Deviating approaches<\/th><th>Outcome<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Germany<\/td><td>\u201cVielzahl\u201d = at least two<\/td><td>A plural can, as a generic term, cover a single element (OLG Karlsruhe 2024)<\/td><td>No decision found requiring more than two or finding the term unclear<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>UPC<\/td><td>Plural = at least two<\/td><td>Objection that \u201cone or more\u201d contradicts \u201cplurality\u201d (LD Milan 2026)<\/td><td>Objection rejected; functional construction<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>EPO \/ UK<\/td><td>At least two; no deviating case law found (EPO: construction with the description under G 1\/24)<\/td><td>\u2014<\/td><td>No deviating decision found<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>US<\/td><td>\u201ctwo or more \u2026 absent some indication to the contrary\u201d<\/td><td>\u201cMore than three\u201d (district court in <em>York<\/em>), \u201cthree or more\u201d (defendants in <em>Dayco<\/em>, <em>Callpod<\/em>); applies to each list item (<em>SIMO<\/em>)<\/td><td>Minimum of two settled; <em>SIMO<\/em> narrows scope for lists<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Japan<\/td><td>\u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d = two or more<\/td><td>\u2014<\/td><td>No deviating decision found; risk lies in translation<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">VIII. Drafting recommendations<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Define the term.<\/strong> One sentence in the description rules out the debate, for example: \u201cFor the purposes of this application, a plurality means a number of at least two.\u201d (In German: \u201eUnter einer Vielzahl bzw. mehreren wird im Sinne dieser Anmeldung eine Anzahl von mindestens zwei verstanden.\u201c) Since G 1\/24 and the UPC case law require the description always to be consulted, such a definition is effective both before the EPO and in infringement proceedings.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Take care with lists.<\/strong> \u201cA plurality of A, B and C\u201d may be read as \u201cat least two A, two B and two C\u201d (<em>SIMO<\/em>). If only A is to be present more than once, \u201ca plurality of A; a B; and a C\u201d is the safe wording.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Do not mix.<\/strong> Do not use \u201cone or more\u201d and \u201cplurality\u201d for the same element (cf. LD Milan).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>If one element is enough, say so.<\/strong> Write \u201cat least one\u201d, \u201cone or more\u201d or \u201c1\u3064\u4ee5\u4e0a\u306e\u201d. Do not rely on the German case law on generic plurals.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>If more than two are needed, say that too.<\/strong> If the function requires at least three elements, \u201cat least three\u201d belongs in the claim. Courts do not derive a higher minimum from \u201cplurality\u201d alone.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Check translations.<\/strong> In Japanese and Chinese, number must be stated expressly. Avoid evaluative quantity words such as \u201c\u591a\u6570\u201d (\u201cmany\u201d).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">IX. Conclusion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>\u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d mean \u201cat least two\u201d in Germany, before the UPC, in the US and in Japan, not \u201cmore than two\u201d. No deviating case law is apparent for the EPO or the United Kingdom.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Readings requiring at least three, or more than three, elements appear mainly as defence arguments. They did not prevail in the decisions reviewed. The clearest correction was of the district court in <em>York Products<\/em>, which had required \u201cmore than three\u201d.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>We found no decision holding \u201cVielzahl\u201d or \u201cplurality\u201d to be unclear.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The real risks lie elsewhere: in lists (<em>SIMO<\/em>), in the relationship between singular, plural and \u201cone or more\u201d, and in translation into languages without grammatical number.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A short definition in the description costs nothing and takes an argument away from the other side.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Research status: September 2026. This overview is based on freely accessible decisions and publications. Subscription databases were not searched.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Sources<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court (LG D\u00fcsseldorf), judgment of 12 December 2018 \u2013 4b O 15\/17, <a href=\"https:\/\/nrwe.justiz.nrw.de\/lgs\/duesseldorf\/lg_duesseldorf\/j2018\/4b_O_15_17_Urteil_20181212.html\">NRWE<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court, judgment of 24 April 2012 \u2013 4b O 274\/10, <a href=\"https:\/\/nrwe.justiz.nrw.de\/lgs\/duesseldorf\/lg_duesseldorf\/j2012\/4b_O_274_10urteil20120424.html\">NRWE<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>D\u00fcsseldorf Regional Court, judgment of 8 August 2019 \u2013 4c O 88\/17, <a href=\"https:\/\/nrwe.justiz.nrw.de\/lgs\/duesseldorf\/lg_duesseldorf\/j2019\/4c_O_88_17_Urteil_20190808.html\">NRWE<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>D\u00fcsseldorf Higher Regional Court (OLG D\u00fcsseldorf), judgment of 4 April 2024 \u2013 2 U 72\/23, <a href=\"https:\/\/nrwe.justiz.nrw.de\/olgs\/duesseldorf\/j2024\/2_U_72_23_Urteil_20240404.html\">NRWE<\/a>; judgment of 23 November 2023 \u2013 2 U 138\/22, <a href=\"https:\/\/nrwe.justiz.nrw.de\/olgs\/duesseldorf\/j2023\/2_U_138_22_Urteil_20231123.html\">NRWE<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court (OLG Karlsruhe), judgment of 28 February 2024 \u2013 6 U 161\/22 (Magnetsteuerventil), commentary: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbh.de\/news\/geistiges-eigentum-medien-it\/olg-karlsruhe-verwendung-des-plurals-im-patentanspruch-als-gattungsbezeichnung\/\">CBH Rechtsanw\u00e4lte<\/a> (German)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>UPC, Local Division D\u00fcsseldorf, decision of 10 October 2024 \u2013 UPC_CFI_363\/2023 (Seoul Viosys v expert), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.unifiedpatentcourt.org\/sites\/default\/files\/files\/api_order\/4670C905E3B2A33A87DBF3FDF6A06846_de.pdf\">UPC<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>UPC, Local Division Milan, decision of 21 April 2026 \u2013 UPC_CFI_472\/2024 et al. (Dainese v Alpinestars), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.unifiedpatentcourt.org\/sites\/default\/files\/upc_documents\/2026-04-21%20LDMilan%20UPC_CFI_472-2024%20DEC_Anonim-12.pdf\">UPC<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>EPO, Enlarged Board of Appeal, G 1\/24 of 18 June 2025, overview: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.jakemp.com\/knowledge-hub\/epos-enlarged-board-of-appeal-holds-that-the-description-and-figures-should-always-be-considered-when-interpreting-the-claims\/\">J A Kemp<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>York Products v. Central Tractor Farm &amp; Family Center<\/em>, 99 F.3d 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1996), <a href=\"https:\/\/caselaw.findlaw.com\/court\/us-federal-circuit\/1368276.html\">FindLaw<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Dayco Products v. Total Containment<\/em>, 258 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2001), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/opinion\/774257\/dayco-products-inc-v-total-containment-inc\/\">CourtListener<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Callpod v. GN Netcom<\/em> (N.D. Ill. 2009), commentary: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.chicagoiplitigation.com\/2009\/04\/plurality-construed-consistent-with-other-uses-of-term-as-greater-than-one\/\">Chicago IP Litigation<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>SIMO Holdings v. Hong Kong uCloudlink<\/em>, 983 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2021), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/1-05-2021-19-2411-simo-holdings-inc-v-hong-kong-ucloudlink-network-opinion-19-2411-opinion-1-5-2021_1711937\/\">CAFC<\/a>; commentary: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cantorcolburn.com\/news-newsletters-315.html\">Cantor Colburn<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>August Technology v. Camtek<\/em> (Fed. Cir. 2011), commentary: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.lexology.com\/library\/detail.aspx?g=4306b50c-c05f-4d97-8b9a-91574fb74f12\">Lexology<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Apple v. MPH Technologies<\/em> (Fed. Cir. 2022), commentary: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ipupdate.com\/2022\/03\/count-on-it-plural-term-means-more-than-one\/\">IP Update<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Salazar v. AT&amp;T Mobility<\/em> (Fed. Cir. 2023), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/opinions-orders\/21-2320.OPINION.4-5-2023_2105955.pdf\">CAFC<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>WIPO, Patent Judicial Guide \u2013 Japan, ch. 7.5 (claim construction, Art. 70 Japanese Patent Act), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wipo.int\/patent-judicial-guide\/en\/full-guide\/japan\/7.5\">WIPO<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>JPAA, \u30d1\u30c6\u30f3\u30c8 2015\/4, \u201c\u65e5\u82f1\u7ffb\u8a33\u306b\u304a\u3051\u308b\u6570\u3068\u51a0\u8a5e\u306e\u6982\u5ff5\u201d (number and articles in Japanese\u2013English translation), <a href=\"https:\/\/jpaa-patent.info\/patents_files_old\/201504\/jpaapatent201504_083-092.pdf\">PDF<\/a> (Japanese)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>JPO, \u8a18\u8f09\u8981\u4ef6\u306b\u95a2\u3059\u308b\u88c1\u5224\u4f8b (court decisions on indefinite expressions), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.jpo.go.jp\/resources\/shingikai\/sangyo-kouzou\/shousai\/kijun_wg\/document\/04-shiryou\/06.pdf\">PDF<\/a> (Japanese)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>JIII, \u8acb\u6c42\u9805\u306b\u304a\u3051\u308b\u5358\u6570\u30fb\u8907\u6570\u306e\u8a18\u8f09\u304c\u6a29\u5229\u7bc4\u56f2\u89e3\u91c8\u306b\u4e0e\u3048\u308b\u5f71\u97ff (2015, on the Chinese SPC decision of 2014)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\u201cPlurality\u201d is one of the most common words in patent claims. German claims say \u201cVielzahl\u201d, Japanese claims \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d (fukus\u016b). Yet infringement proceedings keep returning to the same question: how many elements make a plurality? Are two enough, must there be &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1382","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan - Franke IP Information<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-\u8907\u6570-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dr. Dirk Franke\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Dr. Dirk Franke\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e\"},\"headline\":\"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-27T19:31:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-27T19:31:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2481,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/\",\"name\":\"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan - Franke IP Information\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-27T19:31:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-27T19:31:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png\",\"width\":2400,\"height\":1260},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Franke IP Information\",\"description\":\"IP LAW AND PRACTICE\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e\",\"name\":\"Dr. Dirk Franke\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2013\\\/10\\\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2013\\\/10\\\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2013\\\/10\\\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Dr. Dirk Franke\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/dirkfranke.php\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/FrankePartner\",\"http:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/pub\\\/dirk-franke\\\/7\\\/b20\\\/3a9\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/http:\\\/\\\/franke_ip\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.franke-ip.com\\\/en\\\/author\\\/dirk-franke\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan - Franke IP Information","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-\u8907\u6570-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dr. Dirk Franke","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/"},"author":{"name":"Dr. Dirk Franke","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e"},"headline":"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan","datePublished":"2026-09-27T19:31:03+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-27T19:31:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/"},"wordCount":2481,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/","url":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/","name":"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan - Franke IP Information","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png","datePublished":"2026-09-27T19:31:03+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-27T19:31:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/plurality-featured-image@2x.png","width":2400,"height":1260},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/how-many-make-a-plurality-the-interpretation-of-vielzahl-plurality-and-%e8%a4%87%e6%95%b0-in-europe-the-us-and-japan\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"How many make a plurality? The interpretation of \u201cVielzahl\u201d, \u201cplurality\u201d and \u201c\u8907\u6570\u201d in Europe, the US and Japan"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/","name":"Franke IP Information","description":"IP LAW AND PRACTICE","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/a46c65d4fc47d77b2bb1f21b6e21fa4e","name":"Dr. Dirk Franke","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg","url":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Dr.-Dirk-Franke_avatar_1381400794-96x96.jpg","caption":"Dr. Dirk Franke"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/franke-ip.com\/en\/dirkfranke.php","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/FrankePartner","http:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/pub\/dirk-franke\/7\/b20\/3a9","https:\/\/x.com\/http:\/\/franke_ip"],"url":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/author\/dirk-franke\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1382","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1382"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1382\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1384,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1382\/revisions\/1384"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1382"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1382"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.franke-ip.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1382"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}