Appeal No. 2006-0227 Page 3
Application No. 10/121,264
“[T]he PTO applies to the verbiage of the proposed claims 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
applicant’s specification.” In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027
(Fed. Cir. 1997).
The specification expressly defines most of the terms of the claims:
• a “substrate” is defined as “an object onto which genetic material may be
deposited” (specification, page 16);
• a “matrix” is defined as “a material that includes transfer agent spaces” (id.,
page 14);
• a “transfer agent space” is defined as “a region capable of containing at least
one transfer agent” (id.);
• a “transfer agent” is defined as “a substance onto or into which genetic material
may be deposited, which can transport the genetic material when the transfer agent is
moved” (id., page 13);
• a “transfer agent layer” is defined as “a layer comprising a transfer agent” (id.);
• “purified” is defined as “substantially separated from at least one other material
with which it had been intermingled” (id., page 16);
• an “individual” is defined to include “vertebrate, invertebrate, plant, and
prokaryotic sources” (id., page 19); and
• a “defined population” is defined as “any group of individuals . . . In certain
embodiments, a defined population may include a random group of individuals that may
or may not share at least one common characteristic” (id., page 11).
Thus, when we interpret claim 23 in light of the definitions in the specification, we
conclude that it is directed to a device comprising “an object onto which genetic material
may be deposited,” that object comprising “a material that includes” “a region capable of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007