Appeal No. 2003-0332
Application 09/057,383
We also agree with the Examiner that Shiraishi’s invention anticipates the
invention of claim 1.
The subject matter of claim 1 describes the relationship between two block
rows base upon the angle which is formed by the side surface of the leading edge side
end portion of each block of the first and second block rows and the tangent line to
the tire leading edge side contour line of the ground-contact configuration for the
respective block rows. This description does not require the leading edge side end
portion of the block rows to be straight. In fact, the claim only specifies that the
above described angles for each of the block rows are substantially equal to one
another. In another embodiment, the specification discloses that the absolute
difference between the two angles should be #5°. (Specification, p. 8). The variance
in the angle would result from differences in the structure (i.e. shape) of the blocks in
the rows. In other words, the variance in the angle for the block rows could result
from pitch of the leading edge of the block or result from curvature of the leading
edge of the block. During examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d
1048, 1053-54, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319,
321, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007