Appeal No. 2002-1281
Application No. 08/857,711
The examiner relies on the following references:
Nysen 4,737,789 Apr. 12, 1988
Keller 4,847,614 Jul. 11, 1989
Cantrell 5,184,584 Feb. 9, 1993
Nose et al. (Nose) 5,648,764 Jul. 15, 1997
(filed Jul. 31, 1992)
Additionally, the examiner relies on admitted prior art
(APA), i.e., those things admitted to be known in various
portions of the instant specification.
Claims 1-21, 44 and 45 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over APA, Cantrell and Nysen in view of either
one of Nose or Keller.
Claims 8 and 18 stand further rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we determine the propriety of the rejections
based on 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, since, clearly, one
cannot apply art under 35 U.S.C. § 103 if claim interpretation is
confusing under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. In re Steele,
305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292, 295 (CCPA 1962).
-4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007