Appeal No. 96-2276
Application 08/128,622
29 USPQ2d 1850, 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (in banc), the court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit stated that:
Per our holding, the “broadest reasonable interpretation”
that an examiner may give means-plus-function language is
that statutorily mandated in paragraph six. Accordingly,
the PTO may not disregard the structure disclosed in the
specification corresponding to such language when
rendering a patentability determination.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007