Ex parte HOSOMIZU et al. - Page 15




          Appeal No. 95-3876                                                           
          Application 08/222,009                                                       

                    [W]hen the enabling signal to the transistor is                    
                    merely terminated, as in the circuit of the Iwata et               
                    al[.] patent, the enabling voltage which maintains                 
                    the transistor in a conducting state does not                      
                    dissipate until such time as the capacitance                       
                    component of the transistor has discharged.  In                    
                    contrast, when the enabling voltage is removed, as                 
                    in the present invention, the voltage is actually                  
                    taken away rather than merely allowed to dissipate.                
                    In this regard, it is to be noted that the commonly                
                    understood meaning of the word "remove" connotes                   
                    something more than mere termination or                            
                    interruption.  For example, Webster's New Collegiate               
                    Dictionary defines the word as "to change the                      
                    location, position, station, or residence of."  In                 
                    other words, removal of a physical entity means to                 
                    positively move it from its current state, rather                  
                    than merely fail to maintain it in its state.                      
                    [Original emphasis.]                                               
          Appellants’ position is unpersuasive for the following                       
          reasons.  Since neither the term "remove" nor the phrase                     
          "removing the enabling voltage" is defined in appellants'                    
          specification, that language must be given its broadest                      
          reasonable interpretation consistent with appellants'                        
          disclosure.  See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d                
          1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("the PTO applies to the verbiage                
          of the proposed claims the broadest reasonable meaning of the                
          words in their ordinary usage as they would be understood by                 
          one of ordinary skill in the art, taking into account whatever               
          enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be                 

                                        - 15 -                                         





Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007