Appeal No. 95-4462
Application 08/190,950
& Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826, 221 USPQ 568, 573-74 (Fed.
Cir. 1984).
In the present case, the question raised by appellants’
claim language is how far the diameter of the aperture may
depart from the diameter of the passage in the barrel and yet
be considered “substantially similar to” the barrel passage
diameter. In looking to appellants’ specification for the
necessary guidance, we find nothing therein that would
reasonably apprise one of ordinary skill in the art as to the
threshold between those aperture diameters that are “similar
to” a given passage diameter and those that are not, much less
those aperture diameters that are “substantially similar to” a
given passage diameter and those that are not. In fact,
appellants’ specification gives no hint whatsoever as to the
degree to which the diameter of the aperture may depart from
the diameter of the passage and yet be considered
“substantially similar” thereto.
Absent the necessary guidelines for making such a
determination, there is no way for us to determine the scope
of the claimed subject matter with a reasonable degree of
precision for evaluating the possibility of infringement and
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007