Appeal 2006-2796
Application 09/230,439
1 The Appellant argues that Naka ‘294 does not disclose that the main body
2 (14, figs. 1, 2) is adapted to have horizontal facing material applied thereon
3 (Br. 18). In the embodiment in figure 3, connecting sheet base member 33 is
4 adapted to have applied thereon a tread mat (32) which corresponds to the
5 Appellant’s facing material.
6 The Appellant argues that the Naka ‘294 connecting sheet base member (33)
7 must be attached to the edge cushion cover (31) (Br. 18). During patent
8 prosecution, claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation
9 consistent with the Specification, as the claim language would have been read by
10 one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the Specification. See Zletz, 893 F.2d at
11 321, 13 USPQ2d at 1322; Sneed, 710 F.2d at 1548, 218 USPQ at 388. The
12 Appellant’s Specification does not define “integral”. The ordinary meanings of
13 that term include “formed as a unit with another part”.2 The Appellant’s
14 Specification (4:3-6) indicates that the working material and the fasteners can be
15 made of different materials. Moreover, the recitation in the Appellant’s claim 31
16 that the horizontal and vertical fastening members that are integrally formed with
17 the resilient working member are made of aluminum (which, the Appellant states,
18 is more rigid than the resilient material (Spec. 6:6-10)) indicates that the
19 Appellant’s claim term “integrally formed” encompasses working members and
20 fasteners that are joined together. Thus, because the Naka ‘294 edge cushion cover
21 and connecting sheet base member form a unit when combined, the combination is
22 integral as that term is most broadly construed in view of the Appellant’s
23 Specification.
2 Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary 600 (G. & C. Merriam 1973).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013