Appeal No. 97-0032
Application No. 08/095,295
B.
Where the provisions of § 112, ¶ 6, come into play, the
applicant’s claim is limited to the structure, materials and acts
disclosed in the specification and their equivalents. Valmont
Indus. Inc. v. Reinke Mfg. Co. Inc., 983 F.2d 1039, 1043, 25
USPQ2d 1451, 1454 (Fed. Cir. 1993). "[A]n equivalent results from
an insubstantial change which adds nothing of significance to the
structure, material, or acts disclosed in the patent
specification." Valmont, 983 F.2d at 1043, 25 USPQ2d at 1454.
See also, Alpex Computer Corp. v. Nintendo Co., 102 F.3d 1214,
1222, 40 USPQ2d 1667, 1673-74 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
III.
A.
Looking to the "pivot means" clause of claim 33, it is
apparent that there is no pivot structure recited in the clause
(or anywhere else in the claim). The remainder of the clause
after the phrase "pivot means" describes the pivot means by what
it does or what is to be accomplished, not by what it is. Thus,
the pivot means (1) pivotably attaches the inner wall of a
bellows compartment to a strap; (2) enables the bellows
compartment to pivot with respect to the strap about an axis
2020
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007