In Re C.A. Queener
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1ConcurrencePauline Newman, Circuit Judge
I join the court’s opinion, and agree that the dispositive issue is the breadth of the Queener claims. However, in view of Senior Judge Miller’s interpretation of precedent to hold that the last paragraph of section 112 is reasonably applied, in prosecution before the PTO, so that the claims need not distinguish from the prior art, I write separately to express my concern lest we reopen that closed book. It is now beyond debate that limitations from the specification will not, during examination before the PTO, be imputed to the claims in order to avoid prior art; such limitations must be…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re Yujiro Yamamoto, and Dictaphone Corp., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- In re LundbergCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Application of ArbeitCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
- In Re Cornelius Mulder and Henricus Elisabeth Jozef WulmsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Lewis A. Siegel v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1959
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.