Appeal No. 2003-0539
Application No. 09/188,702
word, “triangles.”1 Given the shape of the holes in appellants’
Figure 2 which correspond to the claimed “substantially
triangularly shaped” having “internal angular corners,” we consider
the terms “substantially triangularly shaped” and “internal angular
corners” used in appellants’ claims to describe the shape of the
holes to be relatively broad terms that encompasses within their
metes and bounds not only the holes illustrated in appellants’
Figure 2 but also the holes of Glickman’s Figure 25 connector. We
find this to be the case notwithstanding that the holes of
Glickman’s Figure 25 connector are trapezoids. In addition, the
holes of the Figure 25 connector of Glickman are radially arranged
such that opposed pairs of holes each have one corner closer to the
other hole of the pair that the other two corners. Thus, all the
structural limitations of claim 1 are found in Figure 25 connector
of Glickman. Hence, claim 1 “reads on” Glickman’s Figure 25
connector, and the Figure 25 connector anticipates claim 1.2
1The word “triangle” may mean “1 : a usu. plane polygon
having three sides.” Also, the word “polygon” may mean “1a : a
closed figure consisting of straight lines joined end to end.”
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam
Company, copyright © 1971.
2In order for a prior art reference to anticipate a claim,
it is not necessary that the reference teach what the subject
application teaches, but only that the claim “reads on” something
(continued...)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007