Appeal No. 97-0943 Page 4
Application No. 08/232,502
for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 12, filed
July 16, 1996) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
The indefiniteness issue
We sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 5 through 7, 9,
10 and 33 through 35 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and
distinctly claim the subject matter which the appellant
regards as the invention, although not for the reasons
specifically stated by the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007