Appeal No. 98-2769
Application 08/485,960
claim is also indefinite. It follows that claims 2 through 5 which depend from claim 1 and claims 7
through 10 which depend from claim 6 are also indefinite.
Regarding independent claim 11, directed to “[a]n electrotransport device,” it is indicated that
the device includes a controller which operates “at a predetermined, fixed electrical output” and which
is adapted to be detachably connected, one at a time, to a plurality of therapeutic agent sources. In
addition, claim 11 requires that the device include or have
“a plurality of different classes of therapeutic agent sources in which a parameter in
each said different classes has been varied so that the electrotransport agent delivery
rate from the controller with one class of therapeutic agent sources is substantially
different from the controller with another of said classes of therapeutic agent sources.”
In this instance, we are at a loss to see how the claimed “electrotransport device” can be said to include
“a plurality of different classes of therapeutic agent sources” when the device, in use, is disclosed as
including only a single therapeutic agent source at a time, not a plurality. Given this ambiguity, we agree
with the examiner that claim 11 is also indefinite. In addition, it follows that claims 12 through 20 which
depend from claim 11 are also indefinite.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007