Appeal 2007-1340
Application 09/996,125
Arguments of the Appellants
Appellants argue that Acharya in combination with Gong and Banga
does not disclose allowing the user to select designated portions of a
document, where the document is a cached document, as claimed. (Br. 5-6;
Reply Br. 3-4.) Instead, Appellants argue that the references disclose
allowing the user to select different and complete versions of a file. (Br. 5-
6; Reply Br. 3-4.) We disagree.
During examination of patent application, a claim is given its broadest
reasonable construction consistent with the specification. In re Prater, 415
F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-51 (CCPA 1969). "[T]he words of
a claim 'are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning.'"
Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1326 (Fed.
Cir. 2005) (en banc) (internal citations omitted). The "ordinary and
customary meaning of a claim term is the meaning that the term would have
to a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention,
i.e., as of the effective filing date of the patent application." Id. at 1313,
75 USPQ2d at 1326.
While it is true that Acharya teaches user selection of different and
complete versions of a file (FF 6-9), that file is part of the "skeleton" of a
Web page containing multiple files (FF 7-8). The plain meaning of the
claim term "portion" is "a part or limited quantity of anything." Webster's
New World Dictionary Third College Edition 1052 (1994). Under a
reasonable interpretation of claim 1, a file that is part of a "skeleton" of a
Web page is a portion of a Web page. Thus, by teaching user selection of a
file that is part of a Web page "skeleton," Acharya teaches user selection of a
portion of a Web page.
29
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013