Ex Parte Rhoades - Page 6

               Appeal 2007-0924                                                                             
               Application 10/401,079                                                                       
               ordinary skill in the art would understand a "retracting mechanism" as used                  
               in the claims to be a means or device for retracting the expandable structure.               
               Moreover, Appellant's use of the term "mechanism" to include an elastic                      
               material is not inconsistent with the ordinary and customary usage of the                    
               term "mechanism," which includes "any system or means for doing                              
               something" (Webster's New World Dictionary 880 (David B. Guralnik ed.,                       
               2nd Coll. Ed., Simon & Schuster, Inc. 1984)).                                                
                      In light of the above, we conclude that claims 2, 5 and 17 are not                    
               "insolubly ambiguous" and are "amenable to construction."  It follows that                   
               they are not invalid for indefiniteness.  The rejection cannot be sustained.                 
                                        The Anticipation Rejection                                          
                      The issue presented to us is whether Wolfe teaches "a means for                       
               storing objects and a means for enclosing the storing objects means wherein                  
               one of the storing objects means and the enclosing means defines an internal                 
               space in which the expandable structure can be manipulated" as required by                   
               claim 16 (App. Br. 14).  This issue turns on whether claim 16, by using                      
               means-plus-function language, requires that the "internal space" defined by                  
               one of the storing objects means and the enclosing means is separate from                    
               the compartment where the objects are stored (App. Br. 14).                                  
                      In essence, Appellant's position appears to be that, as seen in                       
               Appellant's Figures 2, 8 and 11, each of the spaces (annular chamber 17,                     
               ribbon housing 25 and compartment 1109) in which Appellant's ribbon is                       
               stored is separate from the portion of the container or cap in which the                     
               contents of the container are retained (Reply Br. 7).  Accordingly, Wolfe's                  
               hollow cover member 22b, which defines only a single internal compartment                    
               for storing label 20b that is not separate from a compartment for storing                    

                                                     6                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013