Appeal No. 1998-2011
Application No. 08/707,267
Independent claim 1 recites a heater comprising a casing formed by "a succession of
similarly generally square and inwardly open U-section rings," each including a pair of parallel
legs and "a bight portion extending flatly substantially parallel to the axis" (emphasis ours).
Additionally, claim 1 requires that the transverse widths of the legs and bights be "generally the
same" and that the transverse [overall] width of the casing be "generally five times as great as
the width of the legs" (emphasis ours).
The terms "generally" and "substantially" are terms of degree. When a word of degree
is used, it is necessary to determine whether the specification provides some standard for
measuring that degree. See Seattle Box Company, Inc. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc.,
731 F.2d 818, 826, 221 USPQ 568, 573-74 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In Seattle Box, the court set forth the following requirements for terms of degree:
When a word of degree is used the district court must determine whether the
patent's specification provides some standard for measuring that degree. The
trial court must decide, that is, whether one of ordinary skill in the art would
understand what is claimed when the claim is read in light of the specification.
In Shatterproof Glass Corp. v. Libbey-Owens Ford Co., 758 F.2d 613, 624, 225
USPQ 634, 641 (Fed. Cir. 1985), the court added:
If the claims, read in light of the specifications [sic], reasonably apprise those
skilled in the art both of the utilization and scope of the invention, and if the
language is as precise as the subject matter permits, the courts can demand no
more.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007