Appeal No. 1998-2729
Application 08/220,851
disclosure. See In re Anderson, 471 F.2d 1237, 1244, 176 USPQ
331, 336 (CCPA 1973).
In the instant case the Examiner finds no support in the
specification for the claim language defining a cycle as:
a first period when the alert is generated followed
by a second period when the alert is not generated
[answer-page 4]
The Examiner concludes:
This alert can be a sinusoidal wave. A sinusoidal,
or a triangular wave, especially those with a DC
offset, and a square wave with DC offset would all
be periodic and cyclic yet none of these signals
would include periods of time in which the alert was
“on” and periods of time in which the alert was
“off”. [Answer-page 5.]
Appellants cite dictionary definitions and portions of
their specification (brief-pages 3 and 4). We find clear
support for the objected to language at page 7, lines 10-12 of
the specification. Herein Appellants’ specification states:
The silent and audible alert may comprise a
continuous alert or a periodic alert (i.e., alert
cycles). [Emphasis added.]
Thus, we find Appellants claim alert cycles as opposed to a
continuous alert. As we understand, an audible alert could
consist of three rings for example. This would equate to
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007