I appreciate that there are independent claims and dependant claims which, as you correctly point out, narrow the independent. But if you're trying to say something beyond that, I do not follow what it is.

Dependant claims are essentially a few preferred embodiments which may help to determine if there is infringement. But, IMO, you can only infringe on a dependant claim if you infringe on the independent claim to which it referrs. I don't believe it works the other way around. IMO, there is no necessity to prove infringement of any particular preferred embodiment. They are just examples.

Corrections welcomed.

Opty