Appeal No. 97-4184
Application No. 08/521,256
Claims 1-5 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which the appellant regards as the invention.
In the specification, a “prestrained” substrate has been
defined as a substrate that is provided with a particular
density of prongs and then “may be later activated (such as by
heat shrinking) to contract” so that the density of the prongs
is increased (page 6, lines 30-32). An alternative also is
described, wherein a substrate “which is not thermally
activated may be pre-stretched, the prongs 10 applied thereto,
then released and allowed to contract” (sentence spanning
pages 6 and 7). The clear implication here is that
“prestraining” is a condition that exists only during the
manufacturing of the substrate, that is, while the prongs are
being installed, and that when this has been completed, the
substrate no longer is “prestrained.” The specification goes
on to state that “[a] prestrained substrate . . . has the
advantage of providing a preload in the product” (page 6,
lines 33-34; emphasis added). This raises four issues, which
also pertain to the claims. The first is that “preload” is
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007