Appeal No. 2006-0472
Application No. 10/859,119
dual functions, i.e., producing a sufficiently high fluid
temperature and a sufficiently low fluid jet velocity. Moreover,
to the extent that “a relatively larger size fluid jet orifice”
forms part of the corresponding structure, we cannot ascertain
what fluid jet orifice size is included by the structure
corresponding to the claimed means-plus-function components.
This is especially true in this situation since the undefined
relative fluid jet orifice size referred to in the specification
is also dependent on the pressure to which fluid is subjected in
producing a low fluid velocity jet. The specification simply
does not link or associate any specific structure to the dual
functions (producing a sufficiently low fluid jet velocity and a
sufficiently high fluid jet temperature) recited in the claims on
appeal. B. Braun Med., Inc. V. Abbott Labs., 124 F.3d 1419,
1424, 43 USPQ2d 1896, 1899 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“structure disclosed
in the specification is ‘corresponding’ structure only if the
specification or prosecution history clearly links or associates
that structure to the function recited in the claim. This duty
to link or associate structure to function is the quid pro quo
for the convenience of employ § 112, ¶6.”). Nor does the
specification describe the corresponding structure of the claimed
means-plus-function component in such a manner that one skilled
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007