Appeal No. 95-3606
Application 07/827,691
For example, given the phrase its broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the description of the claimed
method in the specification, what scope should be attributed5
to the step of “c) detecting the presence and size of said
amplified nucleic acid by comparison with known standards, and
using techniques known in the art” (Claim 41; emphasis added).
Moreover, we are uncertain as to
the intended meaning and scope of step “d) determining whether
said individual is a carrier for, or afflicted with Fragile X”
(Claim 41) in the context of Claim 41 which is drawn to a
“method for ascertaining whether an individual is a carrier
for, or afflicted with Fragile X comprising [the step of] . .
. determining whether said individual is a carrier for, or
afflicted with Fragile X.”
Accordingly, we remand this application to the examiner
to consider anew of the patentability of the claimed subject
matter under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. § 103.
5 See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d at 321, 13 USPQ2d at 1320.
- 30 -
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007