Ex parte ASCHENBECK et al. - Page 9

               Appeal No. 1998-0241                                                                        Page 9                 
               Application No. 08/465,373                                                                                         

               Beachcombers Int’l, Inc. v. WildeWood Creative Prods., Inc., 31 F.3d 1154, 1158, 31                                
               USPQ2d 1653, 1656 (Fed. Cir. 1994).  On the other hand, 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).                                                                                                        
                      The term "sound" is broadly defined as "an alteration of properties of an elastic                           
               medium, such as pressure, particle displacement, or density, that propagates through the                           
               medium, or a superposition of such alterations" (Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms,                     
               Second Edition (McGraw-Hill 1978)).  While the appellants' specification discloses a particular                    
               sound application wherein the sound is produced using a resonator tube, the specification does                     
               not clearly set forth a definition of "sound" which differs from the conventional definition set                   
               forth above.  Accordingly, we agree with the examiner that the step in Troth's method of                           
               periodically applying deflection air streams, whereby, as described by the appellants (brief,                      
               page 7), "the fibers are deflected by the action of air or other fluids which are periodically                     
               moved toward the fibers so that they impinge on the fibers," meets the broad definition of                         
               "sound."   We see nothing in the appellants' specification which defines "sound" so as to7                                                                                                         

               preclude propagation of pressure or particle displacement produced by a fluid stream.                              

                      7This panel reached the same conclusion with regard to this issue in the related appeal in application No.  
               08/236,067 (appeal No. 97-2328), in which a decision affirming the examiner's prior art rejections was mailed on   
               May 26, 1999.                                                                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007