Appeal No. 2005-2560
Application No. 10/123,447
972 F.2d 1260, 1265, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992). "Broad conclusory
statements regarding the teaching of multiple references, standing alone, are not
'evidence.'” In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617 (Fed. Cir.
1999). "Mere denials and conclusory statements, however, are not sufficient to establish
a genuine issue of material fact." Dembiczak, 175 F.3d at 999-1000, 50 USPQ2d at
1617, citing McElmurry v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 995 F.2d 1576, 1578, 27
USPQ2d 1129, 1131 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Further, as pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first determine the scope of
the claim. "[T]he name of the game is the claim." In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d
1362,1369, 47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998). Therefore, we look to the
limitations of independent claim 1. Here, we find that the language of independent
claim 1 requires “at Ieast one indicator Iamp, permanently installed in said patch panel
adjacent to said patch jack, said indicator Iamp having a first electrical lead in electrical
communication with said first conductive wire and a second electrical Iead in electrical
communication with said second conductive wire.” Appellant argues that neither
Fincher nor Loudermilk teaches or suggests the permanent installation of LED’s into a
patch panel. (Brief at pages 3-4.) We agree with appellant and find that the teachings
of Loudermilk would not have suggested to those skilled in the art to permanently mount
the temporary LED’s in Fincher to be permanent in the patch panel. Fincher teaches
the reuse of the LED connectors rather than a permanent affixation.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007