Appeal No. 1998-0454 Page 5
Application No. 08/417,985
We now analyze the change in claim language from claim 1
of the original patent to the amended claim 1 of the instant
reissue application. The amendment merely changes clearly
inoperative language to language which more precisely describes
the proper operation of the device, including the
interrelationship between the transmission member, the tape
feeding direction change-over member, the trigger member, the
arresting mechanism and the first and second operating members.
We find nothing in this amendment which broadens the scope of
the claim as a whole in any manner whatsoever.
While the examiner has alleged that the added limitations
“involve an undue broadening of the claimed invention” [answer,
page 7], it is not clear from the examiner’s rationale what,
exactly, is alleged to have been broadened. The sole reasoning
of the examiner appears to be that amended claim 1, instead of
encompassing a single operating state, establishes plural
operational states in that, now, either the first or second
operating member is given the potential of being advanced
[answer-bottom of page 4] and/or that the recitation regarding
“when the reel receiving elements stop...the arrested condition
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007