Appeal No. 98-0685
Application No. 08/513,529
outer periphery of the polygonal insert) is to be included "in
a region of said edges." Absent such guidelines, we are of
the opinion that the artisan would not be able to determine
the metes and bounds of the claimed invention with the
requisite degree of precision and particularity. Indeed, this
position is reinforced by the fact that the examiner contends
the connecting body in Miner can, as a broad proposition, be
considered to engage the groove "in the region of the edges"
whereas the appellant vigorously contends that it cannot.
As this Board stated in Ex parte Oetiker, 23 USPQ2d 1651,
1655 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1990), aff'd mem., 1951 F.2d 1267,
23 USPQ2d 161 (Fed. Cir. 1991):
All things considered, because a patentee has
the right to exclude other from making, using and
selling the invention covered by a United States
letters patent, the public must be apprised of what
the patent covers, so that those who approach the
area circum-scribed by the claims of a patent may
more readily and accurately determine the boundaries
of protection in evaluating the possibility of
infringement and dominance. See In re Hammack,
supra.
Here, the public would not be apprised of the scope of
the claimed subject matter.
In summary:
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007