Appeal No. 98-1427
Application No. 08/511,310
web, the underlying disclosure does not inform us as to what
would be like
a web relative to the claimed “tail”. Thus, this language
renders claim 1 indefinite in meaning.
Claim 8 (lines 4 and 5) sets forth that, in a static
position, a normally S-shaped curve is “extending above the
head”. However, as disclosed (depicted in Figures 1, 2, and
10), only water is above the head of the fish bait. Thus, the
claim language is indefinite (inaccurate).
Claim 3 recites a “flattened” and “web-like” strip. The
terms in quotes render claim 8 indefinite in meaning for the
reasons given above relative to the same terms appearing in
claims 1 and 8.
In summary, this panel of the board has reversed the
rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Pond (procedural reversal). Additionally, we
have introduced a new ground of rejection in accordance with
37 CFR 1.196(b).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007