Appeal No. 1998-2551 Page 7
Application No. 08/787,624
argument is that the yarns taught by American Viscose at page
2, lines 85-91, are readable on core and effect yarns. 2
In proceedings before it, the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) applies to the verbiage of the claims
before it the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in
their ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of
ordinary skill in the art, taking into account whatever
enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be
afforded by the written description contained in the
appellant's specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054,
44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See also In re Sneed,
710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
In this case, the appellant's specification is silent as
to what is meant by "core and effect yarn." However, the
2The law of anticipation does not require that the
reference teach what the appellants are claiming, but only
that the claims on appeal "read on" something disclosed in the
reference (see Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760,
772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465
U.S. 1026 (1984)).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007