Appeal No. 98-0102
Application 08/030,734
3, constitute a refrigerator, then claim 4 should so state.
Where, as here, speculative assumptions must be made as
to the meaning of terms employed in the claims and as to the
scope of the claims, in order to make a rejection under 35 USC
§ 103,
such a rejection should not be made. In re Steele, 305 F.2d
859, 863, 134 USPQ 292, 295 (CCPA 1962). We will therefore
reverse, pro forma, the rejections under 35 USC § 103 in this
case. However, this is not to say that if the rejections
under 35 USC
§ 112 made in this decision should be overcome, the claims
would necessarily be patentable over the references on which
the 35 USC § 103 rejections were based.
Conclusion
The examiner’s decision to reject claims 1 to 7, 10, 12,
15 and 24 to 33 under 35 USC § 103 is reversed, pro forma.
Claims 1 to 7, 10, 12, 15 and 24 to 33 are newly rejected
under 35 USC § 112, second paragraph, pursuant to 37 CFR
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007