Appeal No. 95-3789 Page 6
Application No. 08/047,047
697, 701 (Ct. Cl. 1967) ("Courts can neither broaden nor narrow
the claims to give the patentee something different than what he
has set forth [in the claim]."). See also Continental Paper Bag
Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., 210 U.S. 405, 419 (1908); Cimiotti
Unhairing Co. v. American Fur Ref. Co., 198 U.S. 399, 410 (1905).
Accordingly, "resort must be had in the first instance to the
words of the claim" and words "will be given their ordinary and
accustomed meaning, unless it appears that the inventor used them
differently." Envirotech Corp. v. Al George, Inc., 730 F.2d 753,
759, 221 USPQ 473, 477 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Second, it is equally
"fundamental that claims are to be construed in the light of the
specifications and both are to be read with a view to
ascertaining the invention." United States v. Adams, 383 U.S.
39, 49, 148 USPQ 479, 482 (1966).
A review of independent claims 15 and 19 reveals that the
phrase "on the order of" is used three times in each claim.
Specifically, each claim recites that the planar stretch ratio is
"on the order of 9 to 12," that the temperature of the hot
product is "on the order of 185-190°F," and that the container is
internally pressurized at a pressure "on the order of 40 to 45
psig."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007