Appeal 2007-0870
Reissue Application 09/902,904
Patent 6,038,784
Figure 2 of Appellants' Specification depicts mounting structure 20 as a
horizontal bar supporting pegs 18 and 32 such that the bar pivots about a
single axis of rotation as a structure which corresponds to the claimed
"means for imparting lateral stability. . ." as recited in claim 4.
Slipp discloses a mounting structure, i.e., horizontal bar e, supporting
pegs c and d such that the bar e pivots about a single axis of rotation f and
snugly fits into the sides a of the tray (Slipp, p. 1, ll. 83-86; Figs. 3 and 4).
The snug fit of the horizontal bar e into the sides a of Slipp's tray deters any
motion of the pegs other than about the single axis of rotation f, thereby
performing the identical function recited in the means limitation function of
claim 4 using the same or an equivalent structure as that disclosed in
Appellants' Specification.
Appellants argue that the "means for imparting lateral stability to said
pegs" should be construed to require the horizontal bar to extend over the
width of the tray (as shown in Fig. 2 of Appellants' Application) rather than
the length of the tray 9 (as shown in Fig. 2 of Slipp) (Br., 21). We decline to
accept Appellants' claim construction. Instead, we broadly construe "lateral"
as meaning "from side to side," irrespective of which way the tray is turned
(lengthwise or widthwise).
Based on the foregoing, we find that the limitation of a "means for
imparting lateral stability to said pegs, further deterring any motion other
than about said single axis of rotation" recited in claim 4 is disclosed in
Slipp.
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013