Appeal No. 97-2535
Application 08/129,108
The grounds of rejection are as follows:
1. Claims 9, 10, 17/9, 17/10, 18/9 and 18/10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Schutz in view of Rudko and Marques.
2. Claims 14/9, 14/10, 15/14/9 and 15/14/10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the references applied in the rejection of claims 9 and 10 above, and further in view
of Salaun.
3. Claims 9, 10 and 14 through 24 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
appellants regards as their invention.4
With regard to the rejection of the appealed claims under the second paragraph of § 112, the
examiner states that the independent claims, namely claims 9, 16 and 19, "are indefinite because they
are submitted in improper Jepson type format" (answer, page 4). His position is
4We will decide this rejection on basis of the claims that are actually on appeal as we have set forth above.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007