Appeal No. 97-0928 Page 4
Application No. 08/353,190
Initially, we note that the appellant on page 7, lines 8-9,
of the specification states that the "flange 30 is of a solid
construction, with no holes passing through from top to bottom."
In our opinion, the broadest reasonable interpretation2
consistent with the specification of the recited "solid flange"3
is a flange without any holes passing through from the top of the
flange to the bottom of the flange.
Hasty discloses a roof flashing. Figure 6 of Hasty is a
front elevation view, in vertical cross-section, of an embodiment
wherein a collar has a horizontal accordion section, and is
overmolded upon a plastic hard base support. Hasty states
(column 7, lines 1-10) that
FIG. 6 illustrates a third embodiment, wherein an
elastomeric collar, 102 has a circular overmolding flange,
104 that is shown schematically in place upon a hard plastic
2In proceedings before the PTO, claims in an application
are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification, and that claim language should
be read in light of the specification as it would be interpreted
by one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544,
1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
3We note that claim 1 recites "a solid planar flange,"
claim 14 recites "a solid flange," and claim 12 recites "a
flange." Since claim 12 later refers to "the solid flange," we
will read the recitation of "a flange" as being "a solid flange."
The appellant should amend claim 12 to be consistent with this
reading.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007