Appeal No. 98-1427
Application No. 08/511,310
is a flattened web-like strip.
As explained below, claims 1, 3, and 8, in particular,
are considered to be indefinite under the second paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112, since the metes and bounds thereof are not
defined with a reasonable degree of precision and
particularity.
Claim 1 (lines 4 through 8) expressly sets forth the
“tail” as a “flattened” web-like strip that retains, in a
static position, a normally “S-shaped curve”. However, as
depicted, for example, the tail is clearly not a flattened
strip. Thus, the characterization of the strip as being
flattened is simply inaccurate (indefinite). Further, the
recitation of both a “flattened” strip and an “S-shape curve”
adds an inconsistency which renders the claim indefinite in
meaning.
Claim 1 (lines 5 and 6) recites a “web-like” strip. It is
not apparent what is intended by the recitation of “web-like”,
i.e., even if a particular meaning were attributed to the term
web, the underlying disclosure does not inform us as to what
would be like a web relative to the claimed “strip”. Thus,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007