Appeal No. 1999-0348 Page 7
Application No. 08/663,471
Thus, the sole issue presented by the appellants in this
appeal is whether the claimed limitation that the resistance
heater wire be comprised of a material having a melting
temperature defining a secondary thermal cut-off inherently
"reads on" Laibow's electrical resistance wiring (see column
3, lines 20-37).
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). Moreover, limitations are not to
be read into the claims from the specification. In re Van
Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184, 26 USPQ2d 1057, 1059 (Fed. Cir.
1993) citing In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d 1320,
1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Upon review of the appellants' specification, we have
determined the following. First, the temperature at which the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007