Appeal No. 98-2446
Application 08/593,070
thereto in the same sense that appellant’s cover is removably
connected to the container therein, e.g., via the bolt ring
(60) seen in Figures 3, 4 and 6 of the application drawings.
The examiner’s position that the hatch covers of Seitz and
Collier are removably connected to the rail car body therein
“by cutting the weld attachment” (answer, page 5) is
unreasonable and disregards the well settled maxim of our
Patent law that, in proceedings before the Patent and
Trademark Office, claims must be given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specifi-cation,
and that the claim language cannot be read in a vacuum, but
instead must be read in light of the specification as it
would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the pertinent
art. See In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388
(Fed. Cir. 1983),
It follows from the foregoing that the examiner’s
rejection of claims 1 through 3, 8 and 15 through 17 under 35
U.S.C.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007