Appeal No. 97-1656 Page 6
Application No. 08/314,26
The examiner asserts that the phrase “capable of
displaying in plural blocks of display data,” recited in
claims 1 and 2, is indefinite for two reasons. First, he
opines that the phrase capable of displaying “implies the
meaning of ‘capable of but not displaying’, therefore it is
not clear whether each OSD actually display data on plurality
of blocks.” (Examiner’s Answer at 3.) The examiner explains,
“‘capable’ mean[] having the ability or capacity. Having the
capacity does not mean[] that the capacity is being used.”
(Id. at 6.) He concludes, “[t]hus ‘capable of displaying in
plural blocks of display data’ does not necessary [sic,
necessarily] mean[] that the OSDs do actually display in
plural blocks of data and a circuit for that function is
provided.” (Id. at 6.) In response the appellant merely
alleges, “[w]hen the claim language is read in light of the
specification, an artisan would readily understand what the
metes and bounds of the invention are.” (Appeal Br. at 8.)
The appellant does not explain his allegation.
Despite the appellant’s laconic response, claims 1 and 2
should not be denied solely because the claims use the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007