Appeal No. 2006-0026
Application No. 10/012,518
of the appellant and examiner regarding the merits of this
rejection.
DISCUSSION
I. New rejection
The following new rejection is entered pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 41.50(b).
Claims 1, 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and distinctly
claim the subject matter the appellant regards as the invention.
The reference to “said oblong portion” in the last clause of
claim 1 lacks any antecedent basis. This discrepancy renders the
scope of claim 1, and dependent claims 3 and 5, unclear due to the
attendant failure of the claims to define, with a reasonable degree
of precision and particularity, the relationship between the oblong
portion and the other elements of the claimed ball joint.
The problem here presumably arose when claim 1 was amended,
apparently inaccurately and inadvertently, to incorporate the
subject matter set forth in now canceled claim 2 which had recited
that “said cover [member] is formed with an oblong portion to
restrict movement of said extension member.” Should claim 1 be
amended during the course of further prosecution to include such
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007