Appeal No. 97-2999 Page 5
Application No. 08/338,714
The indefiniteness issues
We do not sustain the rejections of claims 33 and 35
through 40 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires claims
to 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 making this determination, the definiteness of the language
employed in the claims must be analyzed, not in a vacuum, but
always in light of the teachings of the prior art and of the
particular application disclosure as it would be interpreted
by one possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent
art. Id.
Claims 33 and 35
We do not agree with the examiner that claim 33 infers
that the male ball is formed of a material "harder" than the
clamp. Claim 33 recites that the male ball is formed of a
material that is "harder" than the female locking portion.
The specification makes clear that the female locking portion
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007