Appeal 2007-2463
Application 10/403,555
Appellant adds that the recited qualifier “substantially…flush” merely
accounts for minor variations, but cannot be interpreted to include Kojima’s
non-flush positional relationship between the securing ring and the bandage.
In fact, Appellant notes, Figure 1a of the present application actually
justifies the use of such a qualifier since it exemplifies the difficulty in
illustrating a precisely-levelled disposition (Reply Br. 3).
The issue before us, then, is relatively narrow: whether Kojima’s end
plate 21 substantially extends substantially flush with the metal pipe 4,
giving the term “flush” its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the
Specification. We conclude that it does.
At the outset, although no fewer than 11 different definitions are
provided from Appellant’s dictionary excerpt (see Ev. App.), we find the
most pertinent definition of “flush” is actually commensurate with the
Examiner’s definition. According to Appellant’s dictionary definition,
“flush” is defined as “4b: directly abutting on or immediately adjacent
to….” See Ev. App. (citing P. 878 of Webster’s Third New International
Dictionary) (emphasis added). Although this dictionary does indicate that
the term “level” is synonymous with “flush,” we nevertheless find that the
scope and breadth of the definition of “flush” noted above is simply not
limited to level structures.
With this construction, we turn to Kojima. In our view, since the
curled portion 21a of Kojima’s end plate (i.e., “securing ring”) 21 directly
abuts, and is immediately adjacent to, the metal pipe 4 (i.e., the “bandage”),
the “securing ring” is therefore at least substantially “flush” with the
bandage under Appellant’s own definition of the term. Although this
directly abutting structure of Kojima is not aligned and completely level as
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013