Ex Parte Lucey - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1998-1328                                                        
          Application No. 08/341,500                                                  


          U.S.C.                                                                      
          § 103.                                                                      









               As pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first                   
          determine the scope of the claim.  "[T]he name of the game is               
          the claim."  In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d              
          1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998).  Moreover, when interpreting a                 
          claim, words of the claim are generally given their ordinary                
          and accustomed meaning unless it appears from the                           
          specification or the file history that they were used                       
          differently by the inventor.  Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro                
          Mechanical Sys., Inc., 15 F.3d 1573, 1577, 27 USPQ2d 1836,                  
          1840.  Although an inventor is indeed free to define the                    
          specific terms used to describe his or her invention, this                  
          must be done with reasonable clarity, deliberateness, and                   
          precision.  In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1479, 31 USPQ2d 1671,              


                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007