Appeal No. 2006-1211
Application 10/277,697
therein. Therefore, the “means” language in this limitation must be construed as limited to the
“corresponding structure” disclosed in the written description in the specification and
“equivalents” thereof. In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1189, 1192-95, 29 USPQ2d 1845, 1848-50
(Fed. Cir. 1994) (en banc).
The “corresponding structure” is that “structure in the written description necessary to
perform that function [citation omitted],” that is, “‘the specification . . . clearly links or
associates that structure to the function recited in the claim.’ [Citation omitted.]” Texas Digital
Sys., 308 F.3d at 1208, 64 USPQ2d at 1822-23. “[A] section 112, paragraph 6 ‘equivalent[]’
. . . [must] (1) perform the identical function and (2) be otherwise insubstantially different with
respect to structure. [Citations omitted.]” Kemco Sales, Inc. v. Control Papers Co., 208 F.3d
1352, 1364, 54 USPQ2d 1308, 1315-16 (Fed. Cir. 2000). “[T]wo structures may be ‘equivalent’
for purposes of section 112, paragraph 6 if they perform the identical function in substantially
the same way, with substantially the same result. [Citations omitted.]” Kemco Sales, 208 F.3d at
1364, 54 USPQ2d at 1315. “[T]he ‘broadest reasonable interpretation’ that an examiner may
give means-plus-function language is that statutorily mandated in [35 U.S.C. § 112,] paragraph
six,” and in this respect, the examiner should not confuse “impermissibly imputing limitations
from the specification into a claim with properly referring to the specification to determine the
meaning of a particular word or phrase in a claim. [Citations omitted.]” Donaldson, 16 F.3d at
1195, 29 USPQ2d at 1850; see also In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1055-56, 44 USPQ2d 1023,
1028 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (explaining Donaldson).
The principal disclosure of “release means” formed “upon the action of the saliva in the
mouth which acts to liberate the filling out of the casing” in the written description in the
specification is “[w]hen zones of reduced thickness are provided in the casing, the passage
means are formed after the confectionery product has been maintained in contact with the saliva
during a few seconds” (page 5, l. 33, to page 6, l. 2; see also page 6, ll. 2-4). The “zones of
reduced thickness” are illustrated by “zones of reduced thickness” 70 in FIGs. 2 and 4 (id., page
17, ll. 13-24). It is further disclosed that “the zone(s) of reduction may be flattened slits . . .
[and] [t]he resulting passage(s) may be formed after a certain time lag between the introduction
of the product in the mouth and the beginning of the release of the filling . . . depending upon the
initial thickness of the reduction, melting properties of the . . . casing, etc.” (id., page 17, ll. 1-8).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007