Appeal No. 95-2440
Application 07/705,726
Under the second paragraph of § 112, the examiner may
reject claims as being indefinite if they omit essential
elements, steps or necessary structural cooperative
relationship of elements. See In re Collier, 397 F.2d 1003,
1005, 158 USPQ 266, 267 (CCPA 1968). Not every omission,
however, renders the claims indefinite, for they need not
recite every detail of patent applicants' process. See In re
Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1017, 194 USPQ 187, 195 (CCPA 1977);
In re Roberts, 470 F.2d 1399, 1403, 176 USPQ 313, 315 (CCPA
1973); In re Rainer, 305 F.2d 505, 509, 134 USPQ 343, 346
(CCPA 1962). Breadth must not be equated with indefiniteness.
In re Miller, 441 F.2d 689, 693, 169 USPQ 597, 599-600 (CCPA
1971).
The examiner has rejected claims 46 through 50, 52, 57
through 61, 63 and 72 through 98 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite. To sustain this rejection,
the examiner made the following conclusory remark:
These claims are vague in that they fail to
recite specific process fabrication steps necessary
to fabricate three dimensional circuits.
This conclusory remark, however, is devoid of any analysis or
explanation. Absent an appropriate analysis or explanation,
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007