Ex Parte KRAUS - Page 136



          Appeal No. 2005-0841                                                        
          Application No. 08/230,083                                                  

               uncommon defect in claiming an invention.  In re Wilder,               
               736 F.2d 1516, 1519, 222 USPQ 369, 371 (Fed. Cir. 1984),               
               cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1209 . . . (1985).  However, the                
               reissue procedure does not give the patentee "a second                 
               opportunity to prosecute de novo his original                          
               application,"  In re Weiler, 790 F.2d 1576, 1582,                      
               229 USPQ 673, 677 (Fed. Cir. 1986).                                    
                    The deliberate cancellation of a claim of an                      
                    original application in order to secure a                         
                    patent cannot ordinarily be said to be an                         
                    "error" and will in most cases prevent the                        
                    applicant from obtaining the cancelled claim by                   
                    reissue.  The extent to which it may also                         
                    prevent him from obtaining other claims                           
                    differing in form or substance from that                          
                    cancelled necessarily depends upon the facts in                   
                    each case and particularly on the reasons for                     
                    the cancellation.                                                 
               In re Willingham, 282 F.2d 353, 357, 127 USPQ 211, 215                 
               (CCPA 1960).                                                           
               If a patentee tries to recapture what he or she                        
               previously surrendered in order to obtain allowance of                 
               original patent claims, that "deliberate withdrawal or                 
               amendment . . . cannot be said to involve the                          
               inadvertence or mistake contemplated by 35 U.S.C. § 251,               
               and is not an error of the kind which will justify the                 
               granting of a reissue patent which includes the matter                 
               withdrawn."  Haliczer v. United States, 356 F.2d 541,                  
               545, 148 USPQ 565, 569 (Ct. Cl. 1966).  "The recapture                 
               rule bars the patentee from acquiring, through reissue,                
               claims that are of the same or of broader scope than                   
               those claims that were cancelled from the original                     
               application."  Ball Corp., 729 F.2d at 1436, 221 USPQ at               
               295 (citations omitted).                                               
          The reissue claims before the court in Mentor were narrower in some         
          respects than the canceled claims and broader in others respects            
          than the canceled claims.  The court in Mentor asserted (998 F.2d           
          at 996, 27 USPQ2d at 1525) that reissue claims that are broader in          
          certain respects and narrower in others than the surrendered                


                                        A-30                                          




Page:  Previous  129  130  131  132  133  134  135  136  137  138  139  140  141  142  143  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007