Appeal No. 96-1943
Application No. 08/147,008
Russell H. Taylor and Yong-Yil Kim (the appellants)
appeal from the final rejection of claims 1-16, 43-46, 57-61
and 66, the only claims remaining in the application.
We REVERSE.
The appellants’ invention pertains to an apparatus for
assisting a surgeon in manipulating a surgical instrument.
Independent claim 1 is further illustrative of the appealed
subject matter and a copy thereof can be found in the appendix
to the brief.
No prior art has been relied on by the examiner.
Claims 1-16, 43-46, 57-61 and 66 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as failing to provide "an
adequate written description" of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-16, 43-46, 57-61 and 66 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.
The rejections are explained on pages 3-6 of the Office
action mailed October 24, 1994 (Paper No. 23). The arguments
of the appellant and examiner in support of their respective
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007