Ex Parte 5779400 et al - Page 16



            Appeal No. 2006-2084                                                                              
            Reexamination Control No. 90/006,360                                                              

                   Claims 16-19 recite a tool insert alone                                                    
                   Claims 1-15 are unquestionably directed to a "small-shank tool" having the                 
            combination of a tool shank, a tool insert, and a threaded fastener, i.e., the                    
            complete tool.                                                                                    
                   We interpret claims 16-19 to be directed to a "tool insert" alone, and not the             
            combination of a tool insert, a tool shank, and a threaded fastener.  It is not                   
            surprising that the claims would claim the insert alone because inserts are sold                  
            separately from shanks.  The preambles of independent claims 16-19 recite                         
            "[a] tool insert for a small-shank tool for an automatic lathe, wherein the                       
            small-shank tool includes a tool shank . . ., and the small-shank tool further                    
            includes a threaded fastener for fixedly attaching the tool insert to the tool shank;             
            said tool insert comprising" (emphasis added).   The transition phrase, "said tool                
            insert comprising" indicates that what is being claimed is the insert alone.  The                 
            preamble phrase "for a small-shank tool" is interpreted to be a statement of                      
            intended use, i.e., the tool insert is intended to be used with a tool shank and                  
            fastener, which are not claimed as part of the combination.  "There is an extensive               
            body of precedent on the question of whether a statement of intended use                          


                                                    - 16 -                                                    




Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007