Appeal No. 96-1303
Application 08/098,516
The examiner finds claim 1, the only independent
claim, to be indefinite because "the connected condition" in
the last line of the claim lacks proper antecedent basis. She
asserts on pages 3 and 4 of the answer that "there is no
[prior] positive recitation of 'a connected condition'," and
that "the connected condition" could be construed as being the
connection of the attachment portion recited in lines 3 and 4
of the claim.
A claim is definite (complies with the second
paragraph of § 112) if it "reasonably apprises those of skill
in the art of its scope." In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354,
1361, 31 USPQ2d 1754, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 1994). In the present
case, the examiner focuses on "the connected condition," but
this phrase cannot be read in isolation; the part of claim 1
in which it appears recites "when
the catch means is in the connected position." Since claim 1
previously recites that the separate components of the
attachment portion are "selectively connectable by a catch
means" (line 14), it would be evident to one of ordinary skill
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007