Appeal No. 95-1484
Application 08/070,650
67. Reticulated cellulose produced by the method of
claim 49.
68. Reticulated cellulose produced by the method of
claim 64.[2]
Discussion
A
Even though all rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, have been withdrawn (Examiner’s Answer (Ans.), p.
1), the examiner remains troubled by the meaning of the terms
“substantially pure cellulose” and “substantially continuous
agitation” in Claim 49 (Ans., pp. 2-3, Part I). The examiner
objects to the use of the aforementioned terms in appellants’
claims because, in his view, the claims on appeal are directed
to a method of producing “substantially reticulated cellulose”
which is defined solely as the product of microorganisms of
the genus Acetobacter when cultured under “substantially
continuous agitation” conditions. However, instead of
rejecting appellants’ claims for unpatentability under the
second paragraph of section 112 because they do not
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
In method Claim 64, the recovered reticulated cellulose is2
characterized in the same manner as in method Claim 57.
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007