Appeal No. 96-1819
Application 08/112,151
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b) we make the
following new rejections.
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph. In order to satisfy the second paragraph of § 112, a
claim must accurately define the invention in the technical
sense. See In re Knowlton, 481 F.2d 1357, 1366, 178 USPQ 486,
492-93 (CCPA 1973). Moreover, while the claim language of claims
8-10 may appear, for the most part, to be understandable when
read in abstract, no claim may be read apart from and independent
of the supporting disclosure on which it is based. See In re
Cohn, 438 F.2d 989, 993, 169 USPQ 95, 98 (CCPA 1971). Applying
these principles to the present case, we fail to understand how
(as claim 8 expressly requires) the system can be considered as
being connectable in a second mode wherein said
manually operable vacuum source is disconnected and
disassociated from the collecting means, the
interstitial space being in flow communication with
ambient atmosphere and said outlet port adapted for
connection to transfusion tubing, in the second mode
the manually operable vacuum source is adapted for
direct connection to said drainage tubing and is
activated to draw fluid from said wound into the
manually operable vacuum source. [Emphasis ours.]
Thus, in the same “second mode” the appellant has set forth that,
on the one hand, the vacuum source is “disconnected and disasso-
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007