york prod., anchor wall

REVERSED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3664 Ex Parte Needelman et al 11/028,094 BAHR 102(b) OSTRAGER CHONG FLAHERTY & BROITMAN, P.C. EXAMINER PECHE, JORGE O

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Davis et al 10/787,641 DIXON 103(a) IBM CORPORATION, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW EXAMINER KEATON, SHERROD L

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1623 Ex Parte Antrim et al 10/874,686 MILLS 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) FITCH, EVEN, TABIN & FLANNERY EXAMINER BLAND, LAYLA D
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Clark et al 11/077,330 JEFFERY 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER VU, TRISHA U

2161 Ex Parte Kelley et al 10/624,085 JEFFERY 103(a) Perkins Coie LLP EXAMINER LU, CHARLES EDWARD

2183 Ex Parte Alexander et al 10/835,105 BARRY 112(1)/102(b)/103(a)/112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) IBM CORP (YA) EXAMINER PETRANEK, JACOB ANDREW
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2451 Ex Parte Symons et al 09/971,857 HAHN 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER DIVECHA, KAMAL B
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Schroder 11/657,677 BARRETT 103(a) DILLON & YUDELL LLP EXAMINER MEISLIN, DEBRA S

3734 Ex Parte Pavich et al 11/106,094 O’NEILL 103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG LLP EXAMINER BLATT, ERIC D

We note that the word “substantially” is often construed in patent claims as “largely but not wholly that which is specified.” See York Prods., Inc. v. Cent. Tractor Farm & Family Ctr., 99 F.3d 1568, 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1996). ... In addition, we note that use of words of approximation, such as “substantially,” in a patent claim implies the avoidance of a strict numerical boundary of the specified parameter. See Anchor Wall Sys., Inc. v. Rockwood Retaining Walls, Inc., 340 F.3d 1298, 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

York Products, Inc. v. Central Tractor Farm & Family Center, 99 F.3d 1568, 40 USPQ2d 1619 (Fed. Cir. 1996), 2181