Appeal 2006-2744 Application 09/664,794 Patent 5,584,962 must determine whether the reissued claims were materially narrowed in other respects to avoid the recapture rule." Id. (emphases added), citing for authority Hester, 142 F.3d at 1482-83, 46 USPQ2d at 1649-50; Clement, 131 F.3d at 1470, 45 USPQ2d at 1165. As in North American Container, the language "materially narrowed in other respects" relates for comparison back to the earlier recited "broader aspects of the reissued claim" (i.e., surrendered subject matter). Again, modification of "materially narrowed" with the phrase "in other respects" clarifies that reissue claims will avoid the recapture rule if materially narrowed in respects other than the broader aspects relating to surrendered subject matter. It follows that the express language of Pannu militates against rather than for the Examiner's view that the recapture rule is not avoided if the limitations added to a reissue claim are materially narrowing in respects other than the broader aspects relating to surrendered subject matter. Similarly, in Hester Indus., the Federal Circuit determined that "surrendered subject matter - i.e., cooking other than solely with steam and with at least two sources of steam – has crept into the reissue claims [because] [t]he asserted reissue claims are unmistakably broader in these respects." 142 F.3d at 1482, 46 USPQ2d at 1649. Immediately after making this determination, the court then stated: "Finally, because the recapture rule may be avoided in some circumstances, we consider whether the reissue claims were materially narrowed in other respects." Id. (emphases added). Yet again, the language "materially narrowed in other respects" relates for comparison back to the earlier recited language "[t]he asserted reissue claims 16Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013