Appeal No. 96-3615
Application 08/237,567
II. Part (xi) of (a) [of claim 23] refers to
said aperture. What aperture does this refer to?
While we appreciate the examiner’s point, we believe an
artisan would understand, when reading the claim in light of
the specification, that the aperture recited in sub-paragraph
(vi) of
claim 23 is the same aperture as the one recited in paragraph
(i)
thereof.6
In light of the foregoing, we will not sustain the
6In the interest of further clarifying the claim
language, appellant may wish to change the language “said
container having an aperture disposed” in subparagraph (a)(vi)
of claim 23 to --said aperture being disposed--.
Similarly, appellant may wish to change “said container has an
aperture disposed” (claim 5, paragraph (c)) to --said aperture
being disposed--, and “means for detecting” (claim 23,
subparagraph (a)(xvii) to --said means for detecting--. In
addition, it appears that “said detection means” in claim 17
should be --said spectroscopic means--, and that “said
aperture” (claim 27, paragraph (b); claim 28, paragraph (b))
should be --said one or more apertures--.
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007