Appeal No. 1998-1454 Page 3
Application No. 08/422,840
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a cranking device.
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of exemplary claims 1, 13 and 14, which appear in the
appendix to the appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Seliger et al. (Seliger) 4,083,259 Apr.
11, 1978
Schuitema 4,807,855 Feb.
28, 1989
The following rejections are before us for review.2
1. Claims 1 through 20 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 the appellant regards as the invention.
2. Claims 1 through 12 and 14 through 20 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Seliger.
The examiner's objection to the drawings under 37 CFR §§ 1.83 and 1.842
relates to a matter petitionable under 37 CFR § 1.181 and not to an appealable
matter. See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) §§ 1002 and 1201.
Accordingly, we decline to review the first issue identified on page 6 of the
brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007