Appeal No. 1998-0820
Application No. 08/274,771
circumscribe the particular area with a reasonable degree of
precision and particularity; it is here where definiteness of
the language must be analyzed, not in a vacuum, but always in
light of teachings of the disclosure as it would be
interpreted by one possessing ordinary skill in the art. In
re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA
1977), citing In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235, 169 USPQ 236,
238 (1971). "The legal standard for definiteness is whether a
claim reasonably apprises those of skill in the art of its
scope." In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361, 31 USPQ2d 1754,
1759 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Claim 2 specifically recites "a protective layer of hard
and conductive material capping said magneto-resistive read
head." The sole issue under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph,
is whether the scope of protection sought by this language
sets out and circumscribes a particular area with a reasonable
degree of precision and particularity when viewed in light of
teachings of the disclosure. The ordinary meaning of the term
"conductive" as defined by the dictionary is "having
conductance." The dictionary definition of conductance is
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007