Appeal No. 98-2783
Application 08/450,009
Hillstead 4,856,516 Aug. 15, 1989
Claims 1 through 10 and 28 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim that which appellants
regard as their invention. On page 3 of the answer, the examiner
indicates that
[i]n regards to claim 1, the structure as
defined is indefinite. Also "segments run
longitudinally" is not understood and conflicts
with dependent claims where the segments run
helically.
In regards to claim 28, "branches" lacks
antecedent basis.
Claims 1, 2, 6 and 9 stand additionally rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Hillstead. The examiner
directs attention to Figures 2 and 2A of Hillstead, noting that
The Hillstead reference is interpreted as
follows: the cells are separated by each hoop
52 (figure 2A shows 4 cells), each wire segment
includes a longitudinal part 54 and a
circumferential part 50, each segment are [sic]
"wound around each other at an axially
extending portion," and interconnections 56 are
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007