Appeal 2007-1361
Application 09/681,573
1. Claim Construction
"[T]he PTO gives claims their 'broadest reasonable interpretation.'"
In re Bigio, 381 F.3d 1320, 1324, 72 USPQ2d 1209, 1211 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
(quoting In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1668 (Fed.
Cir. 2000)). "Moreover, limitations are not to be read into the claims from
the specification." In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184, 26 USPQ2d
1057, 1059 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (citing In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13
USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
Here, contrary to the Appellants' argument, claim 1 does not require
making a publication format choice available to a user for selection thereof.
The claim instead recites in pertinent part the following limitations:
"a publication enabler capable of converting a data file into at least one
publication format in response to the publication instruction . . . selecting a
publication format via the publication enabler. . . ." A definition of
"publish" is "disseminate." Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 952
(1985). Giving the representative claim the broadest, reasonable
construction, the limitations merely require selecting at least one format for
dissemination.
In contrast, claim 25 recites in pertinent part the following limitations:
"a processing unit programmed to call the GUI on demand and enable a user
selection of one or more publication formats. . . ." (Emphasis added.)
Giving the independent claim the broadest, reasonable construction, the
limitations require that a user selects at least one format for dissemination.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013