Appeal No. 1997-3148
Application 08/408,088
On pages 8 and 9 of the brief, Appellants argue that
Hoeberechts fails to teach a relatively high resistive
resistor.
Appellants agree that Hoeberechts does teach a resistor 100,
but argues that Hoeberechts does not teach or even suggest
that the resistive polysilicon strips 100 which form resistors
0.4 R and R are high-resistive resistors.
As pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first
determine the scope of the claim. "[T]he name of the game is
the claim." In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d
1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
We note that Appellants' claim 16 recites "a
relatively high-resistive resistor." Turning to Appellants'
specification, we fail to find any particular definition for a
relatively high-resistive resistor. We do acknowledge that on
page 5 of Appel- lants' specification, Appellants disclose
that the preferred embodiment of a high-resistive resistor is
approximately 100K
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007