Appeal No. 97-1974
Application 08/286,696
1.196(b).
Claim 3 is rejected for failure to comply with 35 USC §
112, second paragraph. This claim recites a slot in the base,
"aperture means" extending through the saucer holder, and
"fastener means for mounting said aperture means to said
slot". These recitations are indefinite, in that it is not
apparent how an aperture, i.e., an opening, can be fastened to
another open-ing (the slot). Also, when attempting to read
this claim on appellants' disclosed apparatus, it is not
evident what structure it is intended to define (cf. In re
Cohn, 438 F.2d 989, 993, 169 USPQ 95, 98 (CCPA 1971)).
Presumably the "aperture means" would be the tapped holes in
the saucer holder (page 13, line 9), and "fastener means" is
intended to read on fasteners 104A and 104B, but the fasteners
do not mount the tapped holes to the slot 102 in base 30, but
rather serve to mount the saucer holder 32, as disclosed at
page 13, lines 3 to 16. Since one of ordinary skill would not
be reasonably apprised of the scope of claim 3, it is
indefinite. In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361, 31 USPQ2d
1754, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007