Appeal 2007-1920
Application 09/731,437
present in the thing described in the reference, and that it
would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill.
Inherency, however, may not be established
by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a
certain thing may result from a given set of
circumstances is not sufficient.
In re Robertson, 169 F.3d 743, 745, 49 USPQ2d 1949, 1950-51 (Fed. Cir. 1999)
(citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
ANALYSIS
We first construe the meaning of the phrase “spacing member” as used by
the Appellant in claim 1, from which all appealed claims depend. The
Specification makes clear that the “spacing member” holds the support member in
a position generally below the engagement member and outwardly from the
hunter’s body (Finding of Fact 1). The Specification further includes language that
the “spacing member” must “extend th[e] support at a selected distance from a
hunter's body and below the hunter's waist and allow for the direct or indirect
engagement of the holder with the hunter or the hunter's apparel.” (Finding of Fact
2). Giving the claims their broadest reasonable construction in light of the
Specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, we
therefore construe “spacing member” to mean a member that extends the support
member a selected distance from a hunter’s body and below the hunter’s waist.
This is consistent with the plain language of the claim that the spacing member
extends generally inwardly and upwardly from the support member.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013