Appeal No. 2004-1517
Application No. 09/765,172
art." Texas Digital Sys., Inc. v. Telegenix Inc., 308 F.3d 1193,
1202, 64 USPQ2d 1812, 1817 (Fed. Cir. 2002), cert. denied,
538 U.S. 1058 (2003).
"Moreover, the intrinsic record also must be examined in
every case to determine whether the presumption of ordinary and
customary meaning is rebutted." (citation omitted). "Indeed,
the intrinsic record may show that the specification uses the
words in a manner clearly inconsistent with the ordinary meaning
reflected, for example, in a dictionary definition. In such a
case, the inconsistent dictionary definition must be rejected."
Tex. Digital Sys., 308 F.3d at 1204, 64 USPQ2d at 1819. ("[A]
common meaning, such as one expressed in a relevant dictionary,
that flies in the face of the patent disclosure is undeserving of
fealty."); Id. (citing Liebscher v. Boothroyd, 258 F.2d 948, 951,
119 USPQ 133, 135 (CCPA 1958) ("Indiscriminate reliance on
definitions found in dictionaries can often produce absurd
results.")). "In short, the presumption in favor of a dictionary
definition will be overcome where the patentee, acting as his or
her own lexicographer, has clearly set forth an explicit
definition of the term different from its ordinary meaning."
Tex. Digital Sys., 308 F.3d at 1204, 64 USPQ2d at 1819.
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007