Appeal No. 2000-2154
Application 09/136,761
edge profile. Also, once a side edge has been ground by
Mdller’s grinding wheel, the profile of the wheel’s annular
surface and the profile of the side edge would be the same.
Appellant further contends on page 3 of the reply brief
that if he asserted claim 1 in court, the court would “insist
that a correct interpretation should include all features in
independent claim 1.” Nevertheless, whatever may be the
merits of this argument, the Court in In re Morris, 127 F.3d
1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1028 (Fed. Cir. 1997), reaffirmed
that during prosecution before the PTO, claims are to be given
their broadest
reasonable interpretation, rather than to be interpreted as
they would be by a court in a post-issuance proceeding. We
have given claim 1 its broadest reasonable interpretation
here.
Accordingly, we conclude that Mdller meets all the
structure recited in claim 1, and will sustain the rejection
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007