Appeal No. 1996-2094
Application No. 08/302,085
Cir. 1994). The first inquiry is to determine whether the
claims set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity.
The examiner’s position is that the phrases, “larger
than,” and “more adhesiveness” is indefinite and meaningless.
See the Final Rejection mailed July 18, 1995, page 2.
However, breadth itself “is not indefiniteness.” In re
Gardner, 427 F.2d 786, 788, 166 USPQ 138, 140 (CCPA 1970).
The definiteness of the language employed must be analyzed not
in a vacuum, but in light of the teachings of the particular
application. See In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235, 169 USPQ
236, 238 (CCPA 1971). Applying the analysis set forth above,
appellants’ specification, discloses two distinct insulator
materials. A first dielectric constant insulator layer 2 is
exemplified by a substantial number of materials which have
dielectric constants of 1.89 through 2.2, values which are
lower than the usual, widely used polyimides. A second
polyimide insulator layer 3, has a dielectric constant of 3.3
which is “larger than” the first dielectric constant. See
specification, page 1, lines 21-29, page 7, lines 10-12,
Figure 11 and page 7, line 35 through page 8, line 9.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007