Appeal No. 1999-0089 Page 9
Application No. 08/454,076
“In the patentability context, claims are to be given
their broadest reasonable interpretations. Moreover,
limitations are not to be read into the claims from the
specification.” In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184, 26
USPQ2d 1057, 1059 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (citing In re Zletz, 893
F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). Here,
in contrast to claims 18, 38, 40, and 42, claims 39 and 41
merely specify in pertinent part the following limitations:
“an encoded signal ... encoded in a first or second mode, said
first mode having been carried out by intra-frame predictive
encoding and field-based orthogonal transformation and said
second mode having been carried out inter-frame prediction
encoding and frame-based orthogonal transformation ....”
Giving the claims their broadest reasonable interpretations,
the limitations require at least a first and second mode of
encoding, wherein the first mode is implemented by an intra-
frame prediction encoding technique and field-based orthogonal
transformation and the second mode is implemented by an inter-
frame prediction encoding technique and frame-based orthogonal
transformation.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007