Appeal No. 2004-2103 Page 4
Application No. 10/026,033
In the rejection under appeal, the examiner determined that the claimed linear
solenoid valve was readable on holding valve 36 of Nakanishi. Nakanishi teaches
(column 9, lines 50-53) that the holding valve 36 is a two-position solenoid valve which
is normally open and is closed when a drive signal is supplied by an electronic control
unit 10.
The appellant argues that holding valve 36 of Nakanishi is a two-position valve
not a "linear" valve as claimed. The appellant asserts that "linear" as used in claims 2
and 6 means that the valve has a variety of positions between fully closed and fully
open.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applies to the
verbiage of the claims before it the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in their
ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, taking
into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be
afforded by the written description contained in the appellant's specification. In re
Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See also In re
Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007