Appeal No. 98-2069
Application No. 29/052,369
will sustain the examiner's rejection of the claim under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires claims
to set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity. In re
Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA 1977).
In making this determination, the definiteness of the language
employed in the claims must be analyzed, not in a vacuum, but
always in light of the teachings of the prior art and of the
particular application disclosure as it would be interpreted
by one possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent
art. Id.
The examiner's focus during examination of claims for
compliance with the requirement for definiteness of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, is primarily whether the claims meet
the threshold requirements of clarity and precision, not
whether more suitable language or modes of expression are
available. If the scope of the invention sought to be
patented cannot be determined from the language of the claims
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007