Appeal No. 96-1075
Application 08/041,737
interpretation of the claims is that the superconductor
region and the semiconductor region do not lie atop each
other and are distinct substrate regions on different
substrate locations" (RBr3-4) do not address the effect of
the claimed buffer layer on the claim interpretation.
Limitations are not read into the claims during prosecution.
See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322
(Fed. Cir. 1989) (claims are given their broadest reasonable
interpretation during examination: "The reason is simply
that during patent prosecution when claims can be amended,
ambiguities should be recognized, scope and breadth of
language explored, and clarification imposed.").
Fourth, the limitations of a "layer in contact with and
overlying said semiconductor region" (claims 61 and 66) and
"means in contact with and overlying said semiconductor
region" (claims 71 and 76) do not require that the layer or
means completely cover "all" the semiconductor region. The
recited functions of "for preserving the semiconducting
properties" (claims 61 and 76), "protecting . . . from
contamination" (claim 66), and "for protecting . . . from
contamination" (claim 71) do not require total protection.
- 11 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007