Appeal No. 1998-0688
Application 08/274,158
adds that a skilled artisan finds a “small reflectance” to
fall between 1.5% and 20%.
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). Claims will be given their
broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the
specification, and limitation appearing in the specification
are not to be read into the claims. In re Etter, 756 F.2d
852, 858, 225 USPQ 1, 5 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
We note that Appellant’s claim 1 recites
said document covering means having a substantially
achromatic document covering surface with a regular
reflectance of from 1.5% to 20% and giving a relative
intensity of irregularly reflected light ... of from N4
to N8.5 in terms of lightness in the Munsell color system
[emphasis added].
Appellant’s claim 1, in addition to the different
elements of a conventional image processor, recites specific
properties for the surface of the document cover. These
properties include a substantially achromatic surface as well
as a particular range for the regular reflectance and the
irregularly reflected light intensity. We find that Hosaka in
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007