Appeal No. 1998-3004 Page 8
Application No. 08/290,590
It 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).
The specification sets forth on page 14 that sharp point
52 of post 48 punctures a hole (not shown) in a breakable
reservoir 50 which permits the liquid toxicant therein to leak
out of the reservoir 50 onto a toxicant applicator 46. Thus,
the toxicant applicator 46 is not treated with the toxicant
until the insect bait station is ready to use. This feature
provides the insect bait station with greater safety and
longer shelf life.
In applying the above-noted guidance to the claimed
phrase "selectively breakable reservoir," we reach the
conclusion that the broadest reasonable interpretation of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007