Appeal No. 94-4200
Application 07/979,139
re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA
1977), citing In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232,
1235, 169 USPQ 236, 238 (1971). Furthermore, our reviewing
court points out that a claim which is of such breadth that it
reads on subject matter disclosed in the prior art is rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 rather than under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph. See In re Hyatt, 708 F.2d 712, 715, 218
USPQ 195, 197 (Fed. Cir. 1983) and In re Borkowski, 422 F.2d
904, 909, 164 USPQ 642, 645-46 (CCPA 1970).
In light of the specification, h is a parameter which is
i
influenced by previous sample inputs. Thus, the language in
the claim, "h , a per input memory parameter," is simply set
i
forth this parameter that is influenced by previous sample
inputs. Therefore, we find the claim language sets out and
circumscribes the particular area with a reasonable degree of
precision and particularity when read in light of teachings of
the disclosure as it would be interpreted by one possessing
ordinary skill in the art.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007