Appeal No. 1998-2847 Page 7
Application No. 08/521,873
distinctly claim the subject matter which the appellants
regard as the invention.
Claims 1 and 27 are directed to a combination of an add-
on board and three elements expressed in means-plus-function
format (i.e., means for indicating, entry transition means,
and exit transition means).
Claims drafted in means-plus-function format are subject
to the definiteness requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph:
[I]f one employs means-plus-function language in a claim,
one must set forth in the specification an adequate
disclosure showing what is meant by that language. If an
applicant fails to set forth an adequate disclosure, the
applicant has in effect failed to particularly point out
and distinctly claim the invention as required by the
second paragraph of section 112.
In re Donaldson, 16 F.3d 1189, 1195, 29 USPQ2d 1845, 1850
(Fed. Cir. 1994) (in banc); see also In re Dossel, 115 F.3d
942, 946-47, 42 USPQ2d 1881, 1884-85 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007