Appeal No. 95-3876
Application 08/222,009
transistor Q3 is disclosed. Hence, transistor Q3 is7
necessarily a structure corresponding to the claimed control
means. Excising transistor Q3 from the control means is
technically possible in the abstract, but it is not reasonable
in light of the unambiguous teachings of the specification.
Such excision errantly focusses on whether the corresponding
structure has functional equivalents rather than structural
equivalents. Appellants have satisfied their burden of
clearly linking disclosed structure to the claimed control
means. Cf. Braun Med., 124 F.3d at 1424, 43 USPQ2d at 1900
(Clear linkage is the quid pro quo for employing paragraph six
format.). Undoubtably, Appellants could have chosen more
specific language, but requiring them to do so in the face of
a clear linkage to disclosed structure deprives them of the
benefit of paragraph six. The burden is now on the Office to
provide evidence to render the structures corresponding to the
claimed control means obvious.
The embodiments shown in Figures 6(a) and 6(b), however,7
do not appear to require transistor Q6.
- 39 -
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007