Appeal No. 1997-0726 Page 7
Application No. 08/329,398
the term "compliant" is not synonymous with "resilient"
and appellants specification does not preclude the
broader definition of compliant being yieldable. Note
that the wall 30 which is made of steel. Steel, though
being rigid, is yet at the same time one of the most
resilient materials and has a degree of flexibility.
The appellants responded (reply brief, pp. 1-2) to this
position of the examiner by stating that the examiner's
characterization of steel is "unduly metaphysical" and that
Shtarkman's inner casing wall 30 "cannot fairly be considered
to be 'yieldable.'"
We agree with the examiner that the proper interpretation3
of "compliance" as used in claim 1 is "yieldable." However,
we agree with the appellants that Shtarkman's inner casing
wall 30 is not disclosed as being yieldable and thus is not
readable on the claimed "upper compliance member." In that
regard, Shtarkman teaches (column 3, lines 23-26) that the
3It is axiomatic that, in proceedings before the PTO,
claims in an application are to be given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification,
and that claim language should be read in light of the
specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary
skill in the art. In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ
385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007