Appeal No. 96-0998
Application No. 08/180,288
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112, a claim element must not recite a
definite structure which performs the described function. Cole
v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 102 F.3d 524, 531, 41 USPQ2d 1001, 1006
(Fed. Cir. 1996). In the present case, Claim 1 recites the
definite structure of the “voltage generating and pick off
means.” Moreover, Appellant has not argued that 35 U.S.C. § 112,
sixth paragraph, should apply.
Appellant argues that in his invention a single winding is
used, requiring only two output leads. Appeal Brief at 12, lines
22-23. Apparently, Appellant believes that Claim 1 is restricted
to the embodiment of Figure 1 in which a single voltage
generating and pick off means comprises a single winding, and a
single conducting means comprises a single pair of output leads.
However, by its terms Claim 1 is not restricted to only a single
voltage generating and pick off means, nor to only a single
conducting means. Claim 1 uses the open ended word “comprising”
and reads equally well on the embodiment of Figure 2 which, like
Tognola, includes more than one voltage generating and pick off
means and more than one conducting means.
Thus, we agree with the examiner that the claimed subject
matter would have been obvious and the rejection is sustained.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007