Appeal 2007-1059
Application 10/408,598
Upon our review of Appellants’ Specification, we find no express
definition of the term “power monitor.” Nor do we find any implicit
definition that is different from its ordinary and customary meaning. We
find the ordinary meaning of the term “monitor” is best found in the
dictionary. We note that a representative definition for “monitor” is “a
device for recording and controlling a process or activity”.4 Giving the term
“power monitor” its ordinary and customary meaning in the relevant art, we
find that representative claim 1 requires a device for recording or controlling
the power of a signal.
B. 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) REJECTION
In view of the claim interpretation above, we find that Urino
reasonably teaches the limitation of directing one of the extracted diffraction
orders to a power monitor. As detailed in the Findings of Fact section
above, we have found that Urino teaches a monitoring waveguide that
monitors the diffraction orders of the wavelengths of an input signal.
(Finding of Fact 6.) We find that Urino’s monitoring waveguide, by
monitoring the wavelengths of signals, monitors (controls or records) the
power of such signals. Alternatively, we find that Urino’s disclosure of a
photodetection array teaches a device for detecting the power of
4 WEBSTER’S II, New Riverside University Dictionary, 1984, page 765.4
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013