Appeal No. 96-3090 Page 4
Application 08/287,409
INDEFINITENESS
We treat the rejection of claims 45-49 for indefiniteness
first since it has bearing on the other rejections directed
against these claims. Claims 44-49 stand or fall together for
the purposes of the indefiniteness rejection. (Paper 31
(Brief) at 3.) Claims 45-49 each depend directly from
claim 44. Claim 44 recites (Paper 28, emphasis added):
44. An assembly mounted at the location of an
ordinary wall switch and characterized by including:
a pair of terminals connected with a pair of
power line conductors as well as with a load; the
terminals being so arranged that: (i) when they are
electrically connected together, a power line
voltage is applied to the load; and (ii) when they
are electrically disconnected from each other, the
power line voltage is removed from the load; and
a sub-assembly connected with the terminals and
operative to cause these terminals to be shorted
together at certain pre-determined points in time
and to be disconnected from each other at certain
other pre-determined points in time; the sub-
assembly being further characterized in that:
(i) the pre-determined points in time repeat in a
substantially periodic manner; (ii) a wall switch
face plate is interposed between the sub-assembly
and the terminals; and (iii) it will function to4
cause the pre-programmed points in time to occur
irrespective of the presence of a power line voltage
at the power line conductors.
4 We assume that by "it" Appellant means "the sub-
assembly". Appellant should clarify this point in further
prosecution.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007