Appeal No. 2003-1572
Application No. 09/661,747
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, for failing to particularly point out and distinctly
claim the subject matter sought to be patented.
The purpose of the second paragraph of § 112 is to provide
those who would endeavor, in future enterprise, to approach the
area circumscribed by the claims of a patent, with adequate notice
demanded by due process of law, so that they may more readily and
accurately determine the boundaries of protection involved and
evaluate the possibility of infringement and dominance. In re
Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 1382, 166 USPQ 204, 208(CCPA 1970). If the
scope of the invention sought to be patented cannot be determined
from the language of the claims with a reasonable degree of
certainty, a rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, is appropriate. In re Venezia, 530 F.2d 956, 958, 189
USPQ 149, 151 (CCPA 1976).
Independent claim 7 is directed to a method for treating edema
and other types of swelling comprising the step of applying “an
effective treatment amount” of buckwheat hulls to a human.
Independent claim 8 is directed to a method of treating edema
comprising the step of administering “a medically effective amount”
of buckwheat hulls to an epidermal region of a human or an animal.
Independent claim 9 is directed to a therapeutic compress pillow
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007