Appeal No. 96-4172
Application 08/098,594
case basis. Id. at 1172, 37 USPQ2d at 1581 (quoting Eiselstein
v. Frank, 52 F.3d 1035, 1039, 34 USPQ2d 1467, 1470 (Fed. Cir.
1995)). The three independent claims on appeal call for a
heating means for heating sections of wire or rod to coiling
temperature and coiling means communicating with said heating
means for coiling the heating sections to form straight springs.
Subsequently, these same claims recite that the coiling means has
a kiln, rollers, and a coiling bench. With reference to Figure
1, there is no disclosure in the drawings or in the written
specification of both a heating means and a kiln which forms part
of the coiling means. In fact, these two means for heating would
appear to be entirely redundant. At any rate, appellants’
disclosure does not convey the possession of a heating means and
a coiling means having its own separate kiln. For this reason,
the claims fail to comply with the description requirement of 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Claims 16, 17, 19 through 22 and 28 through 30 are rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, for failing to particu-
larly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter appel-
lants regard as the invention. In view of the fact that all
three independent claims on appeal are directed to the subject
matter of a heating means and a coiling means, with said coiling
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007