Appeal No. 1996-3162
Application 08/227,897
(1) Claims 1 to 16, unpatentable for failure to comply with
the first and second paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 112;
(2) Claims 1 to 11, unpatentable over Boutillier in view of
Yamazaki, under 35 U.S.C. § 103;
(3) Claims 12 and 14, unpatentable over Boutillier in view of
Yamazaki, Caughey and Schrage, under 35 U.S.C. § 103;
(4) Claim 13, unpatentable over Boutillier in view of
Yamazaki, Caughey, Payne and Söderlund, under 35 U.S.C. § 103;
(5) Claim 15, unpatentable over Boutillier in view of Yamazaki
and Evans, under 35 U.S.C. § 103;
(6) Claim 16, unpatentable over Boutillier in view of
Yamazaki, Evans and Virr, under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Rejection (1)
This rejection consists of two parts:
(i) a lack of compliance with the enablement requirement of
§ 112, first paragraph, and with the second paragraph of
§ 112, as to certain language in claim 1;
(ii) a lack of compliance with the second paragraph of § 112,
in that claims 13 and 16 are indefinite because the term "said
further remaining portion" therein lacks antecedent basis.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007