Appeal No. 97-4260
Application 08/445,660
assume that the claims are not anticipated by Shuert or Dresen
because not all of the references' bosses are in a non-linear
arrangement, but the claims are not so limited. During patent
examination, pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as
their terms reasonably allow. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321,
13 USPQ 2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Here, the claims
recite a pallet "comprising" certain elements, which leaves
open the inclusion of other, unclaimed structures. Thus, with
respect to the bosses recited in independent claims 8 and 14,
all that the claims require is a plurality (i.e., two or more)
bosses "in a substantially non-linear arrangement", and do not
exclude the presence of other bosses in a linear arrangement.
The following is an enlargement of a portion of Fig. 8 of
Shuert, with reference characters added:
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007