Ex parte DEMASI - Page 3




                 Appeal No. 97-1702                                                                                                                     
                 Application 08/355,599                                                                                                                 


                                                     2                  2                                                                               
                 Webster's dictionary  defines " cover" as -- 2(c): an overlay                                                                          
                 or outer layer esp. for protection . . .(emphasis ours).                                                                               
                 Clearly, the outermost portion the segments 4 of Finn form a                                                                           
                 layer which (in light of this definition) can be considered to                                                                         
                 be a "cover," much as the outermost layer or skin of a                                                                                 
                 baseball is commonly referred to as its cover.  We also                                                                                
                 observe that the examiner throughout the prosecution of this                                                                           
                 case has maintained that the Finn's segments 4 comprise a                                                                              
                 cover and, thus, the appellant had ample opportunity to amend                                                                          
                 the claims to clearly define that the cover is an entirely                                                                             
                 separate member, but chose not to do so until after final                                                                              
                 rejection (at which point the examiner refused to consider                                                                             
                 such an amendment as presenting a new issue - see Paper Nos. 6                                                                         
                 and 10, which refusal was upheld on petition (see Paper No.                                                                            
                 12)).  In effect, the appellant is asking us to read into the                                                                          
                 claims a limitation which he tried to add by way of an                                                                                 
                 amendment after final rejection (the entry of which was                                                                                
                 denied).  This, we decline to do.                                                                                                      




                          2    Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language,                                                    
                 Unabridged, G. & C. Merriam Co., Springfield, MA, 1971.                                                                                
                                                                           3                                                                            




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007