Appeal No. 2005-0410
Application No. 09/902,461
they were used differently by the inventor.” Carroll Touch Inc. v. Electro Mechanical
Systems, 15 F.3d 1573, 1577, 27 USPQ2d 1836, 1840 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In reading the words in the claims, we find that one skilled in the art1 would have
understood the “ordinary and accustomed meaning” of “periodically” to be “at regular
intervals” or “from time to time,” as set forth in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary attached
as Exhibit A of the appellant’s brief. Thus, we find that said person would have
understood that the claimed method is directed to the administration of human acid "-
glucosidase “at regular intervals” or “from time to time.”
Moreover, in turning to the specification2 we find that the appellant has used the
term “periodically” in a manner consistent with the dictionary definition. That is, we find
that the specification discloses that the phrase “periodically at an administrative
1 We point out that our appellate reviewing court has repeatedly stated that “the
best indicator of claim meaning is its usage in context as understood by one of skill in
the art at the time of the invention.” Moba v. Diamond Automation, Inc., 325 F.3d 1306,
1315, 66 USPQ2d 1429, 1435 (Fed. Cir. 2003); see also, Ferguson Beauregard v.
Mega Sys., LLC, 350 F.3d 1327, 1338, 69 USPQ2d 1001, 1009 (Fed. Cir. 2003)(“The
words used in the claims must be considered in context and are examined through the
viewing glass of a person skilled in the art”); Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52
F.3d 967, 986, 34 USPQ2d 1321, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 1995) en banc, aff’d 517 U.S. 370
(1996)(“The focus is on the objective test of what one of ordinary skill in the art at the
time of the invention would have understood the term to mean”).
2 “It is important here to understand that under this analysis claims which on first
reading – in a vacuum, if you will – appear indefinite may upon a reading of the
specification disclosure or prior art teachings become quite definite.” In re Moore, 439
F.2d 1232, 1235 n.2, 169 USPQ 236, 238 n.2 (CCPA 1971).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007