A particular preamble may be deemed to be limiting if, when the elements recited in the body of the claims are combined as claimed, the result must itself be the type of device recited in the preamble.
Background / Facts: The patent being asserted here is directed to infant socks with “gripper” surfaces that provide traction for crawling and walking. In this regard, the claims recite “[a]n infant sock for crawling infants comprising” a “sock member” and a “gripper member.” The accused product has similar gripper surfaces, but disposed on a shoe not a sock.
Issue(s): Whether the preamble requires, when the elements recited in the body of the claims are combined as claimed, that the resultant product must itself be a sock.
Holding(s): Yes. “We think the answer plain from the specification, which uniformly describes what results from combining the sock member with the gripper member as itself remaining a ‘sock.’ … In particular, the specification distinguishes a sock from a ‘shoe,’ which can be undesirable or difficult to put on an infant; so the addition of the gripper cannot transform the sock into a shoe.” The court therefore affirmed “the construction of the preambles as limiting to the extent necessary to express the idea that the claims each cover a sock, not a shoe or another article that may be derivative or partly made up of a sock but is not itself a sock.”