Appeal No. 94-3371
Application 07/986,878
by a person skilled in the art to be a “trace amount.” For these
reasons, the examiner’s rejection of claims 10-14 over Nadler
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
As for claims 15-17, these claims require the dispersant to
include a “minor amount” of an additional component comprising a
metal salt of a dihydrocarbyldithiophosphoric acid. The
examiner’s position is that “the presence of ‘a minor amount’ of
an additional component is given no patentable significance since
‘a minor amount’ include trace amounts which would not materially
effect [sic, affect] the process” (Answer, page 7). Again, we do
not agree.
While claims are to be given their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim
language should be read in light of the specification as it would
be interpreted by one having ordinary skill in the art. In re
Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
On page 84 of the specification, appellants disclose that
[t]he oil solutions ... also may contain other useful
additives including metal dihydrocarbyl dithiophos-
phates, viscosity improvers, including those having
dispersant or detergent properties, compositions
generally referred to as friction modifiers when added
to oils, etc. When included in the oil solution, these
additives are present in amounts of from about 0.1 to
about 20%, more generally from 0.1 to about 10% by
weight. [Emphasis ours.]
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007