Appeal No. 1998-1965 Page 12
Application No. 08/357,325
Claims 11 and 18 both recite that the "insert module" has
"a dominant component and a secondary component" and that each
component has "a rectangular outer frame finish portion for
defining the outer perimeter of said light transmitting port."
In our view, these limitations taken together would properly
be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as
requiring
(1) each component to have a unitary/integral finish portion
(e.g., border) defining the outer perimeter of the light
transmitting port, and (2) the shape of the unitary/integral
finish portion (e.g., border) is rectangular.
Claim 1 recites that the "insert module" has "a dominant
rectangular frame component and a secondary rectangular frame
component." In our view, these limitations taken together
would properly be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the
art as requiring each component to have a unitary/integral
finish portion (e.g., border) in the shape of a rectangle.
It is our determination that the above-noted limitations
of claims 1, 11 and 18, are not taught or suggested by Miller
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007