Appeal No. 1998-2356
Application 08/373,860
Before addressing an examiner's rejections based on prior art, it is an essential prerequisite that
the claimed subject matter be fully understood. Accordingly, we initially direct our attention to
appellant's claims on appeal to derive an understanding of the scope and content thereof.
As set forth in the preamble of claim 1 on appeal the subject matter appellant regards as his
invention is “[a] lighter than air balloon enclosing a light source.” Thus, we understand the subject
matter of appellant’s claim 1 to be the combination of a lighter than air balloon and a light source
contained within the balloon. However, we note that the body of claim 1 additionally sets forth that the
balloon is “secured at pole level by a feeder cable,” and that the light source is “supported by a rod,
attached to the pole.” These recitations convey the impression that the subject matter on appeal is
something more than just the balloon and light source set forth in the preamble of the claim, that is, that
the subject matter on appeal is an assembly of components apparently including a balloon, a light
source, a feeder cable, a rod supporting the light source within the balloon and a pole of some type
attached to the rod and supporting the balloon at a certain level above the ground. Accordingly, we
find claim 1 to be indefinite since the subject matter defined in the body of the claim is inconsistent with
the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007