Appeal No. 1999-0635 6
Application No. 08/688,825
interpreting the scope of the claim. See Kropa v. Robie, 187
F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951).
In the case of appellant's claim 5, the language in the
body of the claim shown in bold above appears to us to
incorporate the door mentioned in the preamble as part of the
claimed invention because incorporation of the door is
essential to permit one of ordinary skill in the art to
understand what is meant by the limitations shown in bold and,
hence, what structure is required to meet those limitations.
Moreover, as the door is further limited in the preamble as
being "mounted to a door frame," this limitation is further
incorporated as part of the claimed invention. See Bell
Communications Research, Inc. v. Vitalink Communications
Corp., 55 F.3d 615, 620, 34 USPQ2d 1816, 1820 (Fed. Cir. 1995)
(In a claim reciting in the preamble a "method for
transmitting a packet . . . said packet including a source
address and destination address," the steps of broadcasting
"said packet" and associating an identifier with "said packet"
in the body of the claim were held to have incorporated by
reference the preambular phrase "said packet including a
source address and destination address." As a result, the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007