Appeal No. 2004-0189 Page 6
Application No. 09/782,782
degree. The trial court must decide, that is, whether one of ordinary skill
in the art would understand what is claimed when the claim is read in light
of the specification.
In Shatterproof Glass Corp. v. Libbey-Owens Ford Co., 758 F.2d 613, 624, 225
USPQ 634, 641 (Fed. Cir. 1985), the court added:
If the claims, read in light of the specifications [sic], reasonably apprise
those skilled in the art both of the utilization and scope of the invention,
and if the language is as precise as the subject matter permits, the courts
can demand no more.
Indeed, the fundamental purpose of a patent claim is to define the scope of
protection5 and hence what the claim precludes others from doing. All things
considered, because a patentee has the right to exclude others from making, using and
selling the invention covered by a United States letters patent, the public must be
apprised of what the patent covers, so that those who approach the area circumscribed
by the claims of a patent may more readily and accurately determine the boundaries of
protection in evaluating the possibility of infringement and dominance. See In re
Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 1382, 166 USPQ 204, 208 (CCPA 1970).
5 See In re Vamco Machine & Tool, Inc., 752 F.2d 1564, 224 USPQ 617 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007