Appeal 2007-2815
Application 10/498,809
Appellants argue that Burk’s system functions differently from the claimed
system because Burk’s system “includes an exhaust gas/coolant heat
exchanger 16, which is positioned on the exhaust gas side in an exhaust gas
branch of the vehicle engine. Thus, the heat exchanger 16 extracts heat from
the vehicle exhaust gas system” (id. at 6). Appellants also point out that
Burk’s system uses parallel arrangements of exterior and glycol heat
exchangers, requiring an additional redirection valve, as well as more piping
and valves, resulting in a system that, they assert, is more complicated and
expensive, yet less efficient, than the claimed system (id. at 6-7).
We are not persuaded by these arguments. Claim 29 recites “[a]
reversible vapor compression system for heating and comfort cooling of a
vehicle cabin or passenger compartment, said reversible vapor compression
system including a refrigerant circuit having at least” the named components
with the claimed “inter-connection” (emphases added).
Because it uses the open terms “including” and “at least” to describe
the device, claim 29 encompasses devices, such as Burk’s, that have
additional components not recited in the claim. See Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst
Marion Roussel, Inc., 314 F.3d 1313, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“‘Comprising
is a term of art used in claim language which means that the named elements
are essential, but other elements may be added and still form a construct
within the scope of the claim.’ . . . The word ‘include’ means the same
thing.”).
Moreover, the fact that the claimed invention may be advantageous
when compared to Burk is irrelevant to whether Burk anticipates claim 29.
See In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1482 n.11 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (“[E]vidence of
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013