Appeal No. 95-2502
Application No. 07/763,625
processing step in claim 1 or whether appellants intended the
processing step of claim 4 to be separate and distinct from
the processing step of claim 1. If the claim language is read
literally, the processing step of claim 4 is defined as if it
is separate and distinct from the processing step of claim 1.
Appellants’ specification, however, suggests that only a
single processing step is involved with regard to the data
obtained in the counting step. Likewise, it is unclear
whether appellants intended the processing step of claim 5 to
merely recite further details of the processing step in claims
1 or 4 or whether appellants intended the processing step of
claim 5 to be separate and distinct from the processing steps
in claims 1 and 4.
It also is unclear whether appellants intended the
evaluating steps of claims 6 and 7 to be separate and distinct
from the evaluating step of claim 1 or whether appellants
intended the evaluating steps of claims 6 and 7 to merely
recite further details of the evaluating step in claim 1. It
also is unclear whether appellants intended the remaining
steps in claim 6 and the steps in claim 8 to be part of or
independent from the processing step recited in claim 1 or
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007