Appeal No. 1998-0338
Application No. 08/350,865
Appellant is not permitted to engage "in a post hoc
attempt to redefine the claimed invention by impermissibly
incorporating language appearing in the specification into the
claims." In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1480, 31 USPQ2d 1671,
1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Claim 14 refines the “stress
transferring” means to be
“a volume of oxide, . . . contacting a planar upper surface of
said foundation layer.” To read the limitations of claim 14
into claim 12 would make claim 14 redundant with claim 12.
The claim 12 language is broader than claim 14 and only
requires the “stress transferring” means to be “directly under
said [upper] conductive plate, . . . [and] disposed between
said conductive plugs.” This is clearly shown in APA, and
requires no holes in the lower conductive plate. Appellant’s
specification supports this analysis wherein it states “In
some embodiments, there are no openings in the first [lower]
plate but rather a relatively wide elongated volume of oxide
between the first plate and the second plate transfers stress
without cracking and prevents the oxide mesh from cracking.”
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007