Appeal No. 1998-1642 Page 4
Application No. 08/541,894
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984), it is
only necessary for the claims to "'read on' something
disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim
are found in the reference, or 'fully met' by it."
In the instant case the examiner finds that the Hoffman
reference as depicted in Figures 8a-8c discloses the invention
as
claimed (See examiner’s answer at page 6). In regard to the
recitation in claim 24 that the blade is held under tension
between first and second members, it is the examiner’s opinion
that this language refers to functional language which is not
entitled to patentable weight and if the language is entitled
to weight, the blade depicted in Hoffman Figures 8a-8c is
inherently held under tension as claimed.
We do not agree with the examiner that the functional
language in claim 24 is not entitled to patentable weight. We
must, and we will give weight to all claim limitations
including functional language. In re Angstadt, 537 F.2d 498,
501, 190 USPQ 214, 217 (CCPA 1976).
As a preliminary matter, we find it necessary to
interpret the term “tension” which appears in the functional
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007