Appeal No. 1998-1578
Application No. 08/543,827
Appealed claims 1 and 14, which are representative of all
the appealed claims, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined teachings of Larson and Ho.
Similarly, appealed claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined teachings of
Scott and Ho.
We start by analyzing the scope of the appealed claims.
Gechter v. Davidson, 116 F.3d 1454, 1460 n.3, 43 USPQ2d 1030,
1035 n.3 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1479,
31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994). It is axiomatic that
in proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,
claims
are interpreted by giving words their broadest reasonable
meanings in their ordinary usage, taking into account the
written description found in the specification. In re Morris,
127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In
re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed.
Cir. 1989).
new grounds of rejection on a claim-by-claim basis. If
necessary, the examiner should enter additional new grounds of
rejection on any or all the dependent claims.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007