Appeal No. 2006-0028
Application No. 10/435,858
international maritime dangerous good code, to freight such
dangerous goods.” As this limitation is no longer present, it is
improper to read it back into the claim. During patent
examination, claims are to be given their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the underlying specification without
reading limitations from the specification into the claims. In re
Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-51 (CCPA 1969).
Hence, the appellant’s position that the subject matter
recited in the claim distinguishes over that disclosed by Jörg is
unconvincing. Therefore, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) rejection of the claim as being anticipated by Jörg.
SUMMARY
Since at least one rejection of the claim has been sustained,
the decision of the examiner to reject the claim is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection
with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED
CHARLES E. FRANKFORT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007