Ex parte GAINES - Page 7




          Appeal No. 1999-0286                                       Page 7           
          Application No. 08/777,413                                                  


          and accustomed meaning, unless it appears that the inventor                 
          used them differently."  Envirotech Corp. v. Al George, Inc.,               
          730 F.2d 753, 759, 221 USPQ 473, 477 (Fed. Cir. 1984).                      
          Second, it is equally "fundamental that claims are to be                    
          construed in the light of the specification and both are to be              
          read with a view to ascertaining the invention."  United                    
          States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 49, 148 USPQ 479, 482 (1966).                 


               Furthermore, the general claim construction principle                  
          that limitations found only in the specification of a patent                
          or patent application should not be imported or read into a                 
          claim must be followed.  See In re Priest, 582 F.2d 33, 37,                 
          199 USPQ 11, 15 (CCPA 1978).  One must be careful not to                    
          confuse impermissible imputing of limitations from the                      
          specification into a claim with the proper reference to the                 
          specification to determine the meaning of a particular word or              
          phrase recited in a claim.  See E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co.               
          v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 849 F.2d 1430, 1433, 7 USPQ2d 1129,              
          1131 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 986 (1988).                        










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007