Appeal No. 1999-0944
Application No. 08/890,252
See In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 1214, 211 USPQ 323, 326
(CCPA 1981)(an applicant is not limited to claiming only the
specific embodiment described in the specification, but may
instead claim his invention as broad as the prior art and his
disclosure will allow). In the present instance, there is
nothing in the patent disclosure when read in its entirety
that would lead one of ordinary skill in the art to conclude
that the inventive apparatus necessarily depends on
positioning the carriage members such that they are oriented
in upper and lower positions. In fact, certain passages in
the patent specification that describe the invention in more
general
terms suggest just the opposite, i.e., that orienting the
carriage members 60U, 60L in upper and lower positions is not
a necessary requirement. Accordingly, we are in agreement5
5See, for example, page 10, line 25, through page 11, line 5, of the
specification, which reads as follows (with italics added for emphasis):
Pluralities of suction cups 66U, 66L are disposed in aligned
combination, i.e. rows, with the respective carriage members 60U,
(continued...)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007