Appeal No. 2006-2205 Page 6
Application No. 10/699,956
in describing one of the materials (sPP) that the film is
required to include without specifying any particular requirement
for a minimum percentage, by weight, for the recited sPP film
component. The normal usage of the transitional term
“comprising” in patent applications and claims is well understood
as leaving the so claimed subject matter open to the inclusion of
other non-recited elements or steps. See Vehicular Techs. v.
Titan Wheel Int’l, Inc., 212 F.3d 1377, 1383, 54 USPQ2d 1841,
1845 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Appellants refer to paragraphs 0011 and
0014 of their application specification in arguing for a narrower
interpretation of the claimed subject matter. However, there is
no special definition for the transitional term “comprising” that
we can find in those portions of appellants’ specification that
aids appellants claim interpretation argument. Indeed, other
paragraphs (such as, paragraphs 0021 and 0022) of appellants’
specification undercut appellants’ contention in that the
particular embodiments disclosed in the specification were
intended to be illustrative. In this regard, specification
paragraphs 0021 and 0022 make it plain that the claims, as is
normally the case, are to be construed in a non-limiting fashion
rather than being strictly limited to embodiments that were
illustrated in the specification. After all, during examination
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007