Appeal No. 2000-1000
Application No. 08/392,062
requirement must be determined on a case-by-case basis. See
Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563, 19 USPQ2d
1111, 1116 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
The starting point for our analysis is appellant’s
original disclosure, assessed in its entirety.
Considering the background of the invention, a clearly
apparent objective of appellant’s disclosed invention is to
insure that a barrier dam assembly (dam) will not, during use,
slide or otherwise move around in a liquid conduit groove or
work loose since there is a danger that a loose dam would fly
away and cause injury to a lathe operator (specification, page
3, lines 4 through 12, page 4, lines 11 through 16, and page
14, lines 1 through 6 and lines 12 through 16).
Throughout the entirety of the specification, the
reference is continuously to plural components as regards
“locking members” such as “screws or pins” movable in “bores”
in the dam with the clamping of the dam to the “surfaces” of a
liquid conduit groove being accomplished by the engagement of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007