Appeal No. 96-3946
Application No. 08/208,317
protection desired." Appellant asserts (Brief, page 18) that
the use of the term "optional" does not render the claims
indefinite and cites Ex parte Cordova, 10 USPQ2d 1949 (Bd.
Pat. App. & Int. 1987), Ex parte Head, 214 USPQ 551 (Bd. App.
1981), and Ex parte Wu, 10 USPQ2d 2031 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int.
1989), as evidence that the Board has previously upheld the
use of the term "optional." See also Ex parte Holt, 19 USPQ2d
1211 (Bd. App. & Int. 1991). In response to appellant's
arguments, the examiner adds (Answer, page 13), "It is not
'optional' taken alone that obfuscates the claims, but the
fact that calculated ranges of weight percentages depend upon
the claims of the optional constituents. How do these ranges
differ if the optional constituents are included?"
The term "optional" taken alone does not render the
claims
indefinite, as admitted by the examiner. The term merely
denotes alternatives. As to the examiner's position that the
calculated ranges of weight percentages are unclear since they
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007