38516 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 21, 2000 / Notices

156 F.3d 1206, 1213, 48 USPQ2d 1010, 1016

(Fed. Cir. 1998) (‘‘lever moving element for

moving the lever’’ and ‘‘movable link

member for holding the lever * * * and for

releasing the lever’’ were construed as

means-plus-function limitations invoking 35

U.S.C. 112, ¶ 6 since the claimed limitations

were described in terms of their function, not

their mechanical structure).

7. See 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 6. See also B. Braun

Medical, Inc. v. Abbott Lab., 124 F.3d 1419,

1424, 43 USPQ2d 1896, 1899 (Fed. Cir.

1997).

8. See Donaldson, 16 F.3d at 1195, 29

USPQ2d at 1850; see also B. Braun Medical,

124 F.3d at 1425, 43 USPQ2d at 1900; and

In re Dossel, 115 F.3d 942, 946, 42 USPQ2d

1881, 1884–85 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

9. See In re Noll, 545 F.2d 141, 149, 191

USPQ 721, 727 (CCPA 1976) (unless the

means-plus-function language is itself

unclear, a claim limitation written in meansplus-function language meets the

definiteness requirement in 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶

2 so long as the specification meets the

written description requirement in 35 U.S.C.

112, ¶ 1).

10. See In re Knowlton, 481 F.2d 1357,

1366, 178 USPQ 486, 492–93 (CCPA 1973).

11. See Donaldson, 16 F.3d at 1195, 29

USPQ2d at 1850; Knowlton, 481 F.2d at 1366,

178 USPQ at 493.

12. See Dossel, 115 F.3d at 946, 42

USPQ2d at 1885. Under proper

circumstances, drawings may provide a

written description of an invention as

required by 35 U.S.C. 112. Vas-Cath, Inc. v.

Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1565, 19 USPQ2d

1111, 1118 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

13. See Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage

Devices Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 1379, 53

USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (stating

that the ‘‘one skilled in the art’’ analysis

should apply in determining whether

sufficient structure has been disclosed to

support a means-plus-function limitation and

that the USPTO’s recently issued proposed

Supplemental Guidelines are consistent with

the court’s holding on this point); Dossel, 115

F.3d at 946–47, 42 USPQ2d at 1885 (‘‘Clearly,

a unit which receives digital data, performs

complex mathematical computations and

outputs the results to a display must be

implemented by or on a general or special

purpose computer (although it is not clear

why the written description does not simply

state ‘computer’ or some equivalent

phrase.)’’).

14. In considering whether there is 35

U.S.C. 112, ¶ 1 support for the claim

limitation, the examiner must consider not

only the original disclosure contained in the

summary and detailed description of the

invention portions of the specification, but

also the original claims, abstract, and

drawings. See In re Mott, 539 F.2d 1291,

1299, 190 USPQ 536, 542–43 (CCPA 1976)

(claims); In re Anderson, 471 F.2d 1237,

1240, 176 USPQ 331, 333 (CCPA 1973)

(claims); Hill-Rom Co. v. Kinetic Concepts,

Inc., 54 USPQ2d 1437 (Fed. Cir. 2000)

(abstract); In re Armbruster, 512 F.2d 676,

678–79, 185 USPQ 152, 153–54 (CCPA 1975)

(abstract); Anderson, 471 F.2d at 1240, 176

USPQ at 333 (abstract); Vas-Cath Inc. v.

Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1564, 19 USPQ2d

1111, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (drawings); In re

Wolfensperger, 302 F.2d 950, 955–57, 133

USPQ 537, 541–43 (CCPA 1962) (drawings).

15. Even if the disclosure implicitly sets

forth the structure, material, or acts

corresponding to a means-(or step-) plusfunction claim element in compliance with

35 U.S.C. 112, ¶¶ 1 and 2, the USPTO may

still require the applicant to amend the

specification pursuant to 37 CFR 1.75(d) and

MPEP 608.01(o) to explicitly state, with

reference to the terms and phrases of the

claim element, what structure, material, or

acts perform the function recited in the claim

element. See 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 6 (‘‘An element

in a claim for a combination may be

expressed as a means or step for performing

a specified function without the recital of

structure, material, or acts in support thereof,

and such claim shall be construed to cover

the corresponding structure, material, or acts

described in the specification and

equivalents thereof.’’ (emphasis added)); see

also B. Braun Medical, 124 F.3d at 1424, 43

USPQ2d at 1900 (holding that ‘‘pursuant to

this provision [35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 6], structure

disclosed in the specification is

‘corresponding’ structure only if the

specification or prosecution history clearly

links or associates that structure to the

function recited in the claim. This duty to

link or associate structure to function is the

quid pro quo for the convenience of

employing 112, paragraph 6.’’);

Wolfensperger, 302 F.2d at 955, 133 USPQ at

542 (just because the disclosure provides

support for a claim element does not mean

that the USPTO cannot enforce its

requirement that the terms and phrases used

in the claims find clear support or antecedent

basis in the written description).

16. Kemco Sales, Inc. v. Control Papers Co.,

54 USPQ2d 1308, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2000);

Odetics, Inc. v. Storage Tech. Corp., 185 F.3d

1259, 1267, 51 USPQ2d 1225, 1229–30 (Fed.

Cir. 1999).

17. Al-Site Corp. v. VSI Int’l, Inc., 174 F.3d

1308, 1316, 50 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir.

1999); Chiuminatta Concrete Concepts, Inc.

v. Cardinal Indus., Inc., 145 F.3d 1303, 1309,

46 USPQ2d 1752, 1757 (Fed. Cir. 1998);

Lockheed Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 553

F.2d 69, 83, 193 USPQ 449, 461 (Ct. Cl.

1977).

18. IMS Technology, Inc. v. Haas

Automation, Inc., 206 F.3d 1422, 1436, 54

USPQ2d 1129, 1138 (Fed. Cir. 2000);

Valmont Indus. v. Reinke Mfg. Co., 983 F.2d

1039, 1043, 25 USPQ2d 1451, 1455 (Fed. Cir.

1993).

19. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 833, 15

USPQ2d 1566, 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

20. See Donaldson, 16 F.3d at 1194, 29

USPQ2d at 1850 (stating that 35 U.S.C. 112,

¶ 6 ‘‘merely sets a limit on how broadly the

USPTO may construe means-plus-function

language under the rubric of ‘reasonable

interpretation’ ’’).

21. See Noll, 545 F.2d at 149–50, 191

USPQ at 727 (the meaning of equivalents is

well understood in patent law, and an

applicant need not describe in his

specification the full range of equivalents of

his invention) (citation omitted). Cf.

Hybritech Inc. v. Monoclonal Antibodies,

Inc., 802 F.2d 1367, 1384, 231 USPQ 81, 94

(Fed. Cir. 1986) (‘‘a patent need not teach,

and preferably omits, what is well known in

the art’’).

22. See 1994 Guidelines at 60; see also In

re Mulder, 716 F.2d 1542, 1549, 219 USPQ

189, 196 (Fed. Cir. 1983).

Dated: June 15, 2000.

Q. Todd Dickinson,

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual

Property and Director of the United States

Patent and Trademark Office.

[FR Doc. 00–15674 Filed 6–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

abstracted below has been forwarded to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and comment. The

ICR describes the nature of the

information collection and its expected

costs and burden; it includes the actual

data collection instruments, if any.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 21, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY

CONTACT: Judi E. Payne at CFTC, (202)

418–5268; FAX: (202) 418–5527; email:

jpayne@cftc.gov and refer to OMB

Control No. 3038–0017.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Market Surveys (OMB Control

No. 3038–0017). This is a request for

extension of a currently approved

information collection.

Abstract: Sections 8(a)(i) and (ii) of

the Commodity Exchange Act provide

that for the efficient execution of the

provisions of the Act and in order to

inform Congress, the Commission may

make investigations concerning futures

markets and may publish general

information from such investigations. In

certain instances in response to abrupt

and substantial changes in market

prices, Congressional inquiry or other

reasons, the Commission may conduct

full market investigations requiring that

all persons holding futures positions on

the date in question in a specific market

be identified. In such cases, the

Commission issues its call for survey

information pursuant to Commission

Rule 21.02, 17 CFR 21.02.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 21, 2000 / Notices 38517

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for the CFTC’s regulations

were published on December 30, 1981.

See 46 FR 63035 (Dec. 30, 1981). The

Federal Register notice with a 60-day

comment period soliciting comments on

this collection of information was

published on May 9, 2000 (65 FR

26818).

Burden statement: The respondent

burden for this collection is estimated to

average 1.75 hours per response for such

a survey. These estimates include the

time needed to review instructions;

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: 400.

Estimated number of respondents:

400.

Estimated total annual burden on

respondents: 700 hours.

Frequency of collection: On occasion.

Send comments regarding the burden

estimated or any other aspect of the

information collection, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to

the addresses listed below. Please refer

to OMB Control No. 3038–0017 in any

correspondence.

Judi E. Payne, U.S. Commodity Futures

Trading Commission, 1155 21st

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581.

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

CFTC, 725 17th Street, Washington,

DC 20503.

Dated: June 16, 2000.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–15676 Filed 6–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

abstracted below has been forwarded to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and comment. The

ICR describes the nature of the

information collection and its expected

costs and burden; it includes the actual

data collection instruments, if any.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 21, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judi

E. Payne at CFTC, (202) 418–5268; FAX:

(202) 418–5527; email: jpayne@cftc.gov

and refer to OMB Control No. 3038–

0018.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Information Concerning

Warehouses (OMB Control No. 3038–

0018). This is a request for extension of

a currently approved information

collection.

Abstract: Under Commission rules

1.42 and 1.43, 17 CFR 1.42 and 1.43,

contract markets must file a list of all

warehouse regular for delivery. Upon

call by the Commission, a schedule of

warehouses charges and information

concerning delivery notices must also

be furnished. These rules are designed

to assist the Commission in the

prevention of market manipulation and

are promulgated pursuant to the

Commission’s rulemaking authority

contained in section 5a of the

Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 7a.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

number for the CFTC’s regulations were

published on December 30, 1981. See 46

FR 63035 (Dec. 30, 1981). The Federal

Register notice with a 60-day comment

period soliciting comments on this

collection of information was published

on May 9, 2000 (65 FR 26817).

Burden statement: The respondent

burden for this collection is estimated to

average .168 hours per response. These

estimates include the time needed to

review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and

systems for the purposes of collecting,

validating, and verifying information,

processing and maintaining information

and disclosing and providing

information; adjust the existing ways to

comply with any previously applicable

instructions and requirements; train

personnel to be able to respond to a

collection of information and transmit

or otherwise disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: 11.

Estimated number of respondents: 1.

Estimated total annual burden on

respondents: 30 hours.

Frequency of collection: Weekly.

Send comments regarding the burden

estimated or any other aspect of the

information collection, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to

the addresses listed below. Please refer

to OMB Control No. 3038–0018 in any

correspondence.

Judi E. Payne, U.S. Commodity Futures

Trading Commission, 1155 21st

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581,

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

CFTC, 725 17th Street, Washington,

DC 20503.

Dated: June 16, 2000.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–15677 Filed 6–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

abstracted below has been forwarded to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and comment. The

ICR describes the nature of the

information collection and its expected

costs and burden; it includes the actual

data collection instruments, if any.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 21, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judi

E. Payne at CFTC, (202) 418–5268; FAX:

(202) 418–5527; email: jpayne@cftc.gov

and refer to OMB Control No. 3038–

0019.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Stocks of Grain in Licensed

Warehouses (OMB Control No. 3038–

0019). This is a request for extension of

a currently approved information

collection.

Abstract: Under Commission Rule

1.44, 17 CFR 1.44, contract markets

must require operators of warehouses

regular for delivery to keep records on

stocks of commodities and make reports

on call by the Commission. The rule is

designed to assist the Commission in

the prevention of market manipulation

and are promulgated pursuant to the

Commission’s rulemaking authority