Appeal No. 1999-0608 Page 6
Application No. 08/571,471
Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826, 221 USPQ 568, 573-74 (Fed.
Cir. 1984).
Having carefully reviewed appellant's specification,
including the original claims, we find that, with the
exception of claim 1 , the term "substantially" is not used.5
Appellant's specification states: (1) on page 5, a polyimide
(PI) resin known as MELDIN made by Dixon may be used as theTM
resin of the invention; (2) on page 7, the inventive retainer
of Example 1 was
made by immersing a porous PI member (MELDIN 8100 by Dixon,
17% porosity) in fluorinated oil; (3) on page 9, the inventive
retainer of Example 2 was formed from a porous PI member
(MELDIN 9000 by Dixon, 20% porosity) and (4) on page 9, the
inventive retainer of Example 3 was formed from a porous
member of PI resin (UIP-S by Ube Kosan, 8% porosity).
While these portions of the specification disclose a
polyimide resin retainer, they do not provide explicit
guidelines defining the terminology "substantially polyimide"
as used in claim 1. Furthermore, there are no guidelines that
Claim 1 was first amended to include the term "substantially" in Paper5
No. 6.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007