Appeal No. 1999-1127
Application 08/689,164
neither the cited section “nor any other portion of Saito
refers to ‘mechanical bonding’ within the meaning of claims 1-
8. The pastes of Saito are special chemical compositions
which apparently stick together after baking (so that a smooth
interface between layers would be expected).”5
As pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first
determine the scope of the claim. “[T]he name of the game is
the claim.” In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d
1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998). Moreover, when interpreting a
claim, words of the claim are generally given their ordinary
and accustomed meaning unless it appears from the
specification or the file history that they were used
differently by the inventor. Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro
Mechanical Sys., Inc., 15 F.3d 1573, 1577, 27 USPQ2d 1836,
1840 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Although an inventor is indeed free to
define the specific terms used to describe his or her
invention, this must be done with reasonable clarity,
deliberateness, and precision. In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475,
1479, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
5 See page 5 of the appeal brief.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007