Appeal No. 2003-0421
Application No. 09/508,793
specification. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d
1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Appellants have not identified, and
we do not find, any definition of “elastically engaging” in the
original disclosure.4 The term “elastic” is defined by the
examiner as “easily resuming original shape after being stretched
or expanded” or “flexible” (Answer, page 7, citing The American
Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 3rd ed., 1992).
Appellants have not submitted any other definition of “elastic”
but apparently accept the examiner’s first definition (Reply
Brief, page 2). We note that Nakanishi teaches that the material
of the eyelet (or arcuate member 10) is made from a length of
“thin wire” (Nakanishi, col. 2, ll. 18-21), which is the same as
appellants’ disclosure of “thin wire” (specification, page 6, l.
15-page 7, l. 3). Accordingly, to the extent that appellants’
“thin wire” eyelet “elastically engages” the peripheral groove,
we determine that the examiner has established a reasonable
belief that the “thin wire” eyelet of Nakanishi has the same or
similar “elastic engagement” with a peripheral groove, especially
since the broadest reasonable interpretation of “elastically
engaging” includes merely the flexible engagement of the eyelet
4
4We note that the term “elastically engage,” or variations
thereof, can be found in the specification at page 1, l. 8; page
7, l. 1 and l. 21; page 8, ll. 1-2; and page 9, ll. 12-13.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007