Appeal No. 98-1253
Application No. 08/249,931
(CCPA 1962) and In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385, 165 USPQ
494, 496 (CCPA 1970)), we are constrained to reverse the
examiner's rejections of claims 10 and 16 under 35 U.S.C.
102(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 103. We hasten to add that this is a
procedural reversal rather than one based upon the merits of
the §§ 102(b) and 103 rejections.
Under the provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.196(b) we make the
following new rejections:
Claims 7-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph. In order to satisfy the requirements of 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). Here,
each of the claims under consideration require that the plug
form a seal between the terminal and the passage. According
to the specification, however, the element 30 is the
"terminal" (see, e.g., page 4, line 26). Clearly there is no
seal formed between this element and the passage. That is,
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007