Appeal No. 1998-1408 Page 22
Application No. 08/569,529
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)).
Representative claim 15 specifies in pertinent part the
following limitations:
said elongated conductors printed on said sheet are
printed on one portion of said sheet and further
comprising other elongated conductors printed on
another portion of said sheet, said other conductors
printed on said sheet being substantially parallel to
the first said conductors printed on said sheet, said
one portion being contoured around a top and sides of
one leg of said core, said other portion being
contoured around a top and sides of an opposite leg
of said core, said other conductors printed on said
sheet being respectively surface bonded to said
other conductors of said printed circuit board to
form another series of windings around said core.
The language is ambiguous. Giving the claim its broadest
reasonable interpretation, however, the limitations recite
that the flexible, dielectric sheet comprises two portions,
each portion contoured around an opposite leg of a core.
The appellants err in determining the content of the
prior art. Sato discloses a flexible, insulated body,
Translation, p. 4, comprising two portions. The reference
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007