Appeal 2007-0388
Application 10/337,459
20, the eutectic material will not be cooled and hardened by the air flow
(Harvey, col. 4, ll. 10-13).
The branch 14 of Harvey's device is externally threaded at 15 to
engage in a threaded aperture (not shown) of an aircraft wheel rim on which
a tubeless pneumatic tire is mounted so bore 12 will be in communication
with the cavity defined by the rim and the inner surface of the tire (Harvey,
col. 3, ll. 41-47).
The portion of the housing 11 defining the transverse bore 13 of
Harvey's device must be located externally of the wheel rim structure to
permit the tire air to be vented through the transverse bore. Consequently,
the portion of the fuse device located under the transverse bore 13 as
illustrated in Fig. 1, including both the branch 16 and the entirety of billet
19, must be located externally of the wheel rim structure.
OPINION
Appellants allege the Examiner has unreasonably expanded the
terminology "brake heat sink" (Appeal Br. 4). Accordingly, the first issue
presented in this appeal is the proper construction of the term "brake heat
sink" as used in Appellants' claims. We determine the scope of the claims in
patent applications "not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon
giving claims their broadest reasonable construction 'in light of the
specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.'"
Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed.
Cir. 2005) (en banc) (quoting In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d
1359, 1364, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1830 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). Appellants use the
terminology "brake heat sink 10" (Specification 3:7) to label the brake stack
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013