Appeal No. 95-3888
Application No. 08/l05,244
“electronic apparatus” may comprise a “mechanical mechanism”
along with other components, including electronic components.
The examiner also contends that the phrase reciting that
the enable line is connected to “a signal originating in said
electronic apparatus” is vague and confusing because this
recitation “provides no understanding as to how the signal is
generated” [answer-page 4]. The examiner appears to be
confusing the breadth of the claim with vagueness. Appellant
is under no obligation to limit the claim to the specifics of
how the signal is generated unless necessary to circumvent the
prior art. The “signal originating...” is clearly that signal
originating from the printing mechanism which enables
selection of a first or second output voltage level.
The examiner further questions whether the “electrical
signal” and the “signal originating in said electronic
apparatus” are intended to be the same. It is clear from the
disclosure and the claims that the “electrical signal” is that
signal which appears on the enable line which is connected to
the “signal originating in said electronic apparatus.”
With regard to the examiner’s contention that claim 2 is
misdescriptive because it recites that “two different
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007