Appeal No. 96-2372
Application 08/278,676
claim 11, lines 2-6 as being some form of software, we are at
a complete loss to understand what might constitute the "means
for providing further corresponding areas . . ." set forth in
lines 7-9 of claim 11. In that same vein, we are at a loss to
clearly understand the recitation in some of the appealed claims
(e.g., claims 3, 12, 13 and 14) that the apparatus "is arranged
for . . ." performing some function. As an example, exactly how
is the apparatus "arranged for establishing corresponding areas
associated with options in the menu before displaying the options
on the viewscreen," as set forth in claim 13 on appeal? In
considering these kinds of issues the examiner's attention is
directed to Sections 2106-2106.02 and 2185 of the Manual of
Patent Examining Procedure (Rev. 2, July 1996).
Further points to be considered by the examiner
regarding issues under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, relate
to exactly what constitutes "a substantially circular band" as
required in claim 3 on appeal and what constitutes a curved band
shape that is "substantially smaller than 360E" as set forth in
claims 19 and 22 on appeal.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007