Appeal No. 1999-0953
Application No. 08/576,618
Concerning the examiner’s first position, namely, that
the claim language “relatively thick” dome portion and
“relatively thin” area forming a peripheral hinge can both be
simultaneously read on inner section 28 of Murphy, while
appellants’ claim language does not state precisely what the
thickness of the dome portion and the thickness of the hinge
area are, or how much thicker the dome portion is than the
hinge area, it is nevertheless crystal clear that the
relationship between the thicknesses of these parts of the
cover are such that the dome portion is thicker than a
surrounding area that acts as a hinge. Nothing in Seattle Box
Co. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 221
USPQ 568 (Fed. Cir. 1984) , cited by the examiner in support3
of his first theory of obviousness, justifies the strained
claim language interpretation proposed by the examiner.
Because the inner section 28 of Murphy is of uniform
thickness, it cannot simultaneously satisfy both the
“relatively thick” and “relatively thin” limitations of claim
Seattle Box stands for the proposition that when words of3
degree are used in a claim, the specification should be
consulted for determining some standard for measuring that
degree.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007