Appeal 2007-0251
Application 10/085,310
Moreover, the evidence provided from the Web page (apparently
printed February 11, 2004) was last updated on September 9, 2003 (second
printed page) and copyrighted “2003-2004” (third printed page). The instant
application was filed February 28, 2002. The proffered evidence thus does
not necessarily reflect the artisan’s understanding of the term at the time of
invention (on this record, February 28, 2002).
Appellants also rely on a definition for “handheld computer” from
another Web page, which designates 1997 as the date of copyright.
According to the single entry, “handheld computer” is defined as “a
computer small enough to be carried in your pocket.”
The “definition” is, manifestly, informal. Pockets come in a great
variety of sizes, ranging from thimble-sized to very large (e.g., a pocket in
an apron, a farmer’s overalls, a pocketbook, or a backpack). The entity that
provided the asserted definition could not know the size of the reader’s
pocket. We cannot surmise what the size of “your” pocket may be, at this
time or in any future time, without knowing who “you” are and what “you”
are wearing or otherwise possess. Such a “definition” would not provide
reasonable notice as to what the claim might include or exclude.
Moreover, the evidence provided by Appellants may speak to the
meaning of “handheld computer,” but Appellants are not claiming a
“handheld computer.” The preamble of instant claim 15 purports a
“handheld computing device.” Appellants’ evidence does not demonstrate
that the artisan would have considered the term “handheld computing
device” as excluding the laptop or notebook computers described by
Moriconi.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013