Appeal No. 98-0985 Page 3
Application No. 08/271,022
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a method of fitting
an exercise device to a patient. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 42,
which appears in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Whitelaw 2,832,334 Apr. 29,
1958
Makansi et al. 4,822,037 Apr.
18, 1989
(Makansi)
Dalebout 4,850,585 July 25,
1989
Airy et al. 5,052,379 Oct. 1,
1991
(Airy)
Hughes 5,158,519 Oct. 27,
1992
Claims 42-47, 49-52 and 72-74 stand 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 appellants regard as the invention.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007