Appeal No. 96-2608
Application 08/068,498
careful consideration to appellants' specification and claims,
to the applied prior art reference, and to the respective
positions
articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we have made the determinations which follow.
We turn first to the examiner's rejection of appealed
claims 1, 4, 5, 8 and 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph. After reviewing appellants' specification and
claims, and appellants' arguments on page 4 of their brief, it
is our opinion that the scope and content of the subject matter
embraced by appellants' independent claims 1 and 4 on appeal are
clear and definite, and fulfill the requirement of 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, that they provide those who would
endeavor, in future enterprise, to approach the area
circumscribed by the claims, with the adequate notice demanded
by due process of law, so that they may more readily and
accurately determine the boundaries of protection involved and
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007