Appeal No. 2003-0495 Page 8
Application No. 09/256,543
1. Claim Construction
Claims 8 and 16 recite in pertinent part the following limitations: "a filter capable
of allowing a subset of the plurality of channels to pass through the filter, wherein the
subset includes more than one channel. . . ." Giving these claims their broadest,
reasonable construction, the limitations require a filter that can pass more than one
channel.
"[T]he 'broadest reasonable interpretation' that an examiner may give
means-plus-function language is that statutorily mandated in paragraph six [of 35
U.S.C. § 112]." In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1189, 1194-95, 29 USPQ2d 1845, 1850
(Fed. Cir. 1994.) "The plain and unambiguous meaning of paragraph six is that one
construing means-plus-function language in a claim must look to the specification and
interpret that language in light of the corresponding structure, material, or acts
described therein, and equivalents thereof, to the extent that the specification provides
such disclosure." Id. at 1193, 29 USPQ2d at 1848-49.
Here, claim 20 recites in pertinent part the following limitations: "means for
selecting a subset of the plurality of channels, wherein the subset includes more than
one channel. . . ." The appellants' specification discloses that "[i]n accordance with one
embodiment of the present invention, the second, third, and fourth bandpass filters 255,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007