Appeal No. 95-1215
Application No. 07/750,777
Regarding claims 19 and 20, however, they stand on a
different footing . We agree with the examiner that claims 193
and 20 are indefinite since the scope of dependent claims 19
and 20 cannot be ascertained due to their inconsistencies with
their parent claim, claim 11. It is well settled that claims
in dependent form are construed to include all the limitations
of their parent claim. See 37 CFR § 1.75(c). It follows that
dependent claims 19 and 20 encompass not only their specific
limitations, but also all the contradicting limitations of
claim 11. However, we do not observe, and appellant does not
point to, any teaching in the specification which would lead
to clarification of these inconsistencies. Accordingly, we
affirm the examiner’s decision to reject claims 19 and 20
under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
The examiner has rejected claims 11 through 21 under
3In the event of further prosecution of claims 19 and 20,
the examiner is advised to determine whether they do not
further limit the subject matter of their parent claim in
violation of
35 U.S.C. § 112, fourth paragraph, and 37 CFR § 1.75(c).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007