Appeal No. 97-3071
Application 08/484,729
of approximately 60" to 80" is preferred,” this information,
without knowing the piston size (i.e., the diameter and
length) would appear to be of little value. From our
perspective, the appellant’s disclosure is merely an
invitation to experiment, rather than an explanation to the
skilled artisan as to how to make and use the claimed
invention.
Claims 1-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, for failing to particularly point out and
distinctly claim the subject matter the appellant regards as
the invention. Independent claims 1, 8 and 15 are drafted in
either a means or step plus function format as provided for in
paragraph 6 of § 112 which means or step, according to that
provision, will be “construed to cover the corresponding
structure, material, or acts described in the specification
and equivalents thereof.” Failure to describe adequately the
necessary structure, material, or acts in the written
description means that the drafter has failed to comply with
the mandate of the second paragraph of
§ 112. In re Dossel, 115 F.3d 942, 946, 42 USPQ2d 1881, 1884
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007