Appeal No. 1996-3960
Application No. 08/380,444
a second waveguide means is defined by the coaxial
conductors 29, 30 of coax 28, for capacitively coupling
the lower frequency to the waveguide antenna element 10,
by virtue of the capacitance formed between the elements
14, 16 caused by the spacing therebetween and the
dielectric 15 (and wherein a capacitor, as recited in
Claim 3, is connected/formed between the antenna element
13 and one end, that is the connection end plate 32 and
the shield 30 of the second waveguide means 28).
Further, on pages 9 and 10 of the Answer, the Examiner asserts
that Gilbert’s waveguide 28 provides capacitive coupling as
conductors 29 and 30 do exhibit a capacitance.
As pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first
determine the scope of the claim. "[T]he name of the game is
the claim." In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d
1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998). "[D]uring examination
proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification." In re
Hyatt, slip 99-1182 (Fed. Cir, May 12, 2000), (citing In re
Graves, 96 F.3d 1147, 1152, 36 USPQ2d 1697, 1701 (Fed. Cir.
1995) and In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 858, 225 USPQ 1, 5 (Fed.
Cir. 1985). We find that the scope of claims 1 and 3 includes
an antenna which is fed from two waveguides, one of which is
directly connected to the antenna and the other of which is
capacitively coupled to the antenna. This scope is shown in
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007