Appeal No. 2001-0389 Page 2
Application No. 09/237,880
Claims 1 through 26, 29, and 30 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph (indefiniteness).
On page 6 of the brief, appellants state that claims 1
through 26, 29, and 30 stand or fall together. Hence, we
consider claim 1 in this appeal. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(8)
(2000).
Opinion
The examiner states that the claims are indefinite
because of the recitation “C.I. Solvent Yellow 138.” The
examiner states that one of ordinary skill in the art would
not know the compound represented by C.I. Solvent Yellow
138.
The examiner states that C.I. Solvent Yellow 138 does
not identify the dye rather it only identifies the source of
the dye, much like a trademark would function. (answer,
pages 2 through 3).
On page 8 of the brief, appellants submit that C.I.
Solvent Yellow 138 is definite to one skilled in the art,
and that C.I. Solvent Yellow 138 identifies a dye, and not
the source of a dye.
Appellants state that “C.I.” is an abbreviation for
Colour Index. Appellants state that, as is known in the
art, the Colour Index is published by the Society of Dyers
and Colourists and the American Association of Textile
Chemists and Colorists and is the definitive guide for
commercially available dyes and pigments and their technical
properties. (brief, page 8). Appellants state that contrary
to the examiner’s assertion, a C.I. designation is not a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007