Appeal No. 95-3876
Application 08/222,009
Paragraph six applies to the control means
The first claim-construction issue is whether the
contested limitation is a means-plus-function expression
governed by section 112[6]. Unidynamics Corp. v. Automatic
Prods. Intl., 157 F.3d 1311, 1318, 48 USPQ 1099, 1104 (Fed.
Cir. 1998). A limitation written in means-plus-function
format is presumed to invoke paragraph six, although the
presumption is rebuttable. Sage Prods. v. Devon Indus.,
126 F.3d 1420, 1427, 44 USPQ2d 1103, 1109-10 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
If a means-plus-function limitation does not recite definite
structure in support of its function, it is subject to the
requirements of section 112[6]. B. Braun Med. Inc. v. Abbott
Labs., 124 F.3d 1419, 1424, 43 USPQ2d 1896, 1899 (Fed. Cir.
1997). The recitation of some structure in a
means-plus-function element does not preclude the
applicability of paragraph six when it merely serves to
further specify the function of the means. Unidynamics
Corp., 157 F.3d at 1319, 48 USPQ2d at 1104-05.
The control means does not recite any structure
other than the gate of the IGBT. Recitation of the gate is
necessary to specify the function: the node to which the
- 32 -
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007