Interference No. 104,190
When construing the meaning of a claim, we may
consider both intrinsic and extrinsic evidence. Intrinsic
evidence
consists of the claim itself, the specification, and any
prosecution history. Extrinsic evidence includes expert
testimony, inventor testimony, dictionaries, treatises, and
prior art not cited in the prosecution history. We turn to
extrinsic evidence only when the intrinsic evidence is
insufficient to establish the clear meaning of the asserted
claim. Zodiac Pool Care Inc. v. Hoffinger Indus. Inc., 206
F.3d 1408, 1414, 54 USPQ2d 1141, 1145 (Fed. Cir. 2000). See
generally Vitronics Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc., 90 F.3d 1576,
1582-84, 39 USPQ2d 1573, 1576-78 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
It is noted that the claims as originally filed in
the application Serial No. 08/435,505, which matured into the
junior party involved patent, did not include the contested
“first metal blade supporting . . .” language. See claim 1 at
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007