Appeal No. 2000-0581
Application No. 08/429,155
In light of the foregoing, we shall not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 1, 3-8, 10, 12-22 and 24-28.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
The application is remanded to the examiner for
consideration of the following.
In reviewing appellant's claims and specification, we
note the use of claim terminology such as "attaching
device(s)" for mounting replaceable fan blade tip(s) (claims 1
and 28), "aligning means for aligning [the fan blade tips with
the fan blades]" (all claims), "mounting device for receiving
a fan blade tip" (claim 22) and "fastening means for fastening
the replaceable fan blade tip to the fan blade" (claim 28).
The sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 states:
An element in a claim for a combination may be
expressed as a means or step for performing a
specified function without the recital of structure,
material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim
shall be construed to cover the corresponding
structure, material, or acts described in the
specification and equivalents thereof.
Neither the examiner nor appellant has indicated, on the
record, whether any of the above-cited claim recitations
invokes the sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. In any event,
even if these limitations are interpreted as falling under the
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007