Appeal No. 2001-1966
Application 09/140,846
Because we do not sustain the rejection of independent
claims 1 and 30 on appeal, we also reverse the rejection of their
respective dependent claims. Therefore, the decision of the
examiner rejecting claims 1-37 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Claims 1-37 are rejected under the second paragraph of
35 U.S.C. 112 as being indefinite. There is no recitation in the
body of each of independent claims 1 and 30 on appeal of any
display as required by the preamble, and there also is no feature
recited in the body of either independent claim relating to any
electrophoretic elements of any kind as they relate to the
preamble of each claim. The various liquids, capsules and
particles in the bodies of these claims are not said to be
electrophoretic materials. Additionally, according to the nature
of electrophoretic displays, they require at least a pair of
electrodes for each claimed "a capsule" as in claim 1 or the "a
second capsule" in claim 30. In these respects then, the claims
on appeal do not appear to recite within the second paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112, what appellants regard as their invention.
Additionally, it is indeed problematic what the metes and bounds
of the subject matter of independent claims 1 and 30 on appeal
are as well.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007