Appeal No. 97-2902
Application No. 08/170,332
According to the examiner, this is because the center of
gravity of the rider will vary depending upon the weight and
the position of the individual. The appellant argues in
rebuttal that the rejection on indefiniteness is ill-founded.
Our understanding of the appellant’s position is that while
the center of gravity of a rider inherently varies with height
and weight, the “center of gravity of the vehicle and rider
assembly in a position of positive and negative acceleration
in a horizontal direction” is a factor that would have been
understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, and that
determining it would have been within the skill of the
artisan.
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires that
claims set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity. In re
Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA 1977).
In determining whether this standard is met, the definiteness
of the language employed in the claims must be analyzed, not
in a vacuum, but always in the light of the teachings of the
prior art and of the disclosure of the application as it would
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007