Appeal No. 95-3500
Application No. 08/065,438
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, for indefiniteness
regarding the term “mass flow” as employed in step (e) of the
claims.
After having considered the entire record in light of the
respective positions advanced by appellants and the examiner,
we agree with appellants that the claims are sufficiently
definite to comply with the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. §
112. Accordingly, we shall reverse the rejection at issue.
We entirely agree with appellants that, on their face,
the claims clearly define which of the recited fluids is fed
to the energy production unit, namely the oxygen - depleted
gas stream and the non-combustible fluid. Moreover, as amply
demonstrated by appellants, the instant specification is
replete with references to “mass flow” within the energy
production unit and adequately discusses the significance of
each fluid input and output stream. In this regard, pages 27,
29-30, 33-34, 37-38,
42 and 56 are particularly pertinent. The claims cannot be
read in a vacuum but, rather, must be read in light of the
instant specification as it would be interpreted by a person
possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007