Appeal No. 2000-0431 Page 14
Application No. 08/789,127
. . . a compelling reason must exist before the language can be
given weight." Arshal v. United States, 621 F.2d 421, 430-31,
208 USPQ 397, 406-07 (Ct. Cl. 1980) (citing In re de Castelet,
562 F.2d 1236, 1244 n.6, 195 USPQ 439, 447 n.6 (CCPA 1977)).
Here, the expression "covering an entire accessible surface
of said floor" is found only in the preamble of representative
claim 11. It merely states a purpose or intended use of the
claimed “moving apparatus.” The body of the claim neither
repeats nor references the covering of an entire accessible
surface; it instead specifies “a region where said moving
apparatus moves. . . .” Because the language in the body of the
claim standing alone is clear and unambiguous, there is no
compelling reason to give the expression weight.
Assuming arguendo that we give the expression patentable
weight, the limitations require inter alia covering an entire
accessible surface of a floor. “‘All of the disclosures in a
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007