Appeal No. 2002-2090
Application 08/430,311
of flexural reinforcing materials. In that regard, we also
understand that such “plain concrete” will have a strength after
cracking which is less than the strength of the concrete prior to
cracking and wherein the short pieces or fibers of wire are
present in a quantity so as not to meet the requirements for
“flexural reinforcing,” as that term is defined on page 26 of
appellant’s specification. The “cracking” referred to above is
considered to be full cracking of the concrete panel structure
wherein a crack extends entirely through the panel structure.
It is our determination that the above understanding of the
terminology “plain concrete” constitutes the broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification. See, In re
Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983);
In re Tanaka, 551 F.2d 855, 860, 193 USPQ 138, 141 (CCPA 1977).
Looking to the disclosure of Givens, we understand the
fibrous-concrete material therein to be “plain concrete” within
the meaning we have ascribed to that term above. In that regard,
we know from Givens and Romualdi1 that the concrete of Givens
1 “Romualdi” is U.S. Patent No. 3,429,094 issued Feb. 25,
1969 to J. P. Romualdi and incorporated by reference into the
Givens patent disclosure at column 5, lines 7-58.
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007