Appeal No. 1999-1747 Page 10
Application No. 08/715,422
The preamble of claim 1 (i.e., A quick connect coupling
for connecting a brake hose to a brake tube in a hydraulic
brake hose assembly, wherein the brake hose has an inside
diameter in the range of about 1/8 inch to 3/16 inch) leads us
in the direction that only the quick connect coupling is being
claimed, that is, the brake hose and brake tube are not part
of the claimed subject matter. We reach this conclusion based
on the appellant's use of the phrase "for connecting" and the
appellant's designation of the claimed subject matter as being
"A quick connect coupling" rather than a brake hose assembly.
The first clause of claim 1 (i.e., a connector body
having a first end for crimped connection to the brake hose
and a second end for connection to the brake tube) leads us in
5(...continued)
extensive body of precedent on the question of whether a
statement in a claim of purpose or intended use constitutes a
limitation for purposes of patentability. See generally Kropa
v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 155-59, 88 USPQ 478, 483-87 (CCPA
1951) and the authority cited therein, and cases compiled in 2
Chisum, Patents § 8.06[1][d] (1991). Such statements often,
although not necessarily, appear in the claim's preamble. In
re Stencel, 828 F.2d 751, 754, 4 USPQ2d 1071, 1073 (Fed. Cir.
1987).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007