Appeal No. 98-0979 Page 6
Application No. 08/517,909
Upon reading claim 1 in light of the specification, we
interpret "a player" recited in paragraphs (b) and (c) of
claim 1 to be the "at least one player" recited previously in
paragraph (a) of claim 1. Similarly, upon reading claims 11
and 18 in light of the specification, we interpret "a player"
recited in paragraphs (b) and (c) of claims 11 and 18 to be
the "at least one player" recited previously in paragraph (a)
of claims 11 and 18.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 20
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being incomplete
for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap
between the steps.
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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007