Patent claims which are drafted more broadly provide greater exclusionary rights to an Applicant as they include fewer recitations/features than more narrowly drafted patent claims.
As the appropriate level of claim breadth for patentability purposes is determined in view of the prior art, patent claims are generally permitted to be as broad as the prior art allows (assuming they satisfy the threshold inquiry of 35 USC 101). For art areas with limited prior art, more broadly drafted patent claims will more likely be allowed, whereas more narrowly drafted patent claims will generally be allowed for more saturated art areas.
Broadly drafted patent claims (which are valid in view of the prior art) will make it difficult for a competitor to design around, possibly impacting a competitors ability to produce a product which has commercial significance in view of the patent application.
Claim breadth will additionally impact the time and cost of prosecuting a patent application. More specifically, patent applications with more broadly drafted patent claims will usually require additional iterations of correspondence (e.g., office actions) between the Applicant and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) during patent prosecution. Accordingly, time and costs generally increase if the patent application contains more broadly drafted patent claims.
Further, because more broadly drafted patent claims touch more prior art, such claims are more likely to be found anticipated/obvious in view of the prior art during an infringement proceeding if an invalidity defense is raised.