Appeal 2007-0380
Reexamination Control 90/007,199
Patent 6,394,644 B1
between the transverse planes “and substantially from one of said
transverse planes to the other of said transverse planes..”.
21. Figures 1 and 4 of Streiff show the outer surface of the ring shape
structure extending almost completely between the transverse planes.
III. Legal Principles
Claim interpretation
During examination, claims are given their broadest reasonable
construction that is consistent with the specification. In re Hyatt,
211 F.3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1668 (Fed. Cir. 2000). A
limitation may not be read into a claim from the specification, but it is
appropriate to look to the specification to define a limitation already in
the claim. Elekta Instr. S.A. v. O.U.R. Sci. Int'l, Inc., 214 F.3d 1302,
1307, 54 USPQ2d 1910, 1913 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
35 U.S.C. § 102
“A person shall be entitled to a patent unless …. the invention was
patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country
or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the
date of the application for patent in the United States” 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b).
To anticipate a claim, a prior art reference must disclose every
limitation of the claimed invention, either expressly or inherently.
Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051,
1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
Written description
Whether the inventor has provided adequate written description, either
explicitly or inherently, must be determined from the disclosure considered
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013