Appeal No. 96-0939
Application 07/853,221
subject matter with sufficient precision
that the bounds of the claimed subject
matter
are distinct.
In re Merat, 519 F.2d 1390, 1396, 186 USPQ 471, 476 (CCPA
1975).
The examiner states that the expression “in response to
release of the latch means” makes the claim indefinite. The
examiner further questions whether the control means can be
described as intended to start operating by release of the
latch means.
We will not affirm the 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
rejection on this ground. It is clear to us that the phrase
in question “in response to release of the latch means” along
with the preceding expression “control means for limiting
operation of the drive module” clearly and with particularity
demarks the
limit of the claimed invention. We note that the control
means limits the operation of the drive module in the sense
that the drive module is limited to operation when and only
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007