Ex Parte GEDNEY et al - Page 34



              Appeal 2006-1454                                                                                         
              Application 09/004,524                                                                                   
              Patent 5,483,421                                                                                         

                                                         (5)                                                           
                                                  Ex parte Eggert                                                      
                     The opinion in Ex parte Eggert, 67 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int.                              
              2003), issued as a precedential opinion, is also part of the recapture precedent                         
              applicable to proceedings before the United States Patent & Trademark Office                             
              (USPTO).  Eggert was entered on May 29, 2003, prior to the Federal Circuit’s                             
              North American Container decision.  In Eggert, a majority stated that “[i]n our                          
              view, the surrendered subject matter is the outer circle of Drawing 1 [the rejected                      
              claim prior to the amendment that resulted in the claim being issued] because it is                      
              the subject matter appellants conceded was unpatentable.”  67 USPQ2d at 1717.                            
              The majority further held that “in our view” subject matter narrower than the                            
              rejected claim but broader than the patented claim is not barred by the recapture                        
              rule.  Id.  The majority explained that if the finally rejected claim was ABC and the                    
              patent claim was ABCDEF, there would be recapture for ABC or anything broader                            
              than ABC, but not for claims directed to ABCX, ABCDBr, ABCEF, or ABrBCDEF,                               
              because those claims would be narrower than the finally rejected claim ABC.  67                          
              USPQ2d at 1717.  In its opinion, the majority recognized that the Federal Circuit                        
              had held that “the mere presence of narrowing limitations in the reissue claim is                        


                                                        - 34 -                                                         

Page:  Previous  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013