Appeal No. 1999-1987 Page 13
Application No. 08/400,129
appellant's written description provides no enlightenment by
way of definitions or otherwise as to the intended meaning of
"moderately flexible," we must look at the standard dictionary
meanings of those words. The American Heritage Dictionary,
Second College Edition, (1982) defines (1) "flexible" as
"Capable of being bent or flexed; pliable" and (2) "moderate"
as "Within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme." We
find that Albert's rubber tubing or hose 30 is inherently a
structure that is capable of being bent or flexed within
reasonable limits. Thus, we conclude that the limitation
"moderately flexible" is readable on Albert's rubber tubing or
hose 30.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, the appellant argues
(brief, p. 15) that these dependent claims have essentially
been rejected for a lack of novelty under 35 U.S.C. § 102. We
do not agree. While the examiner did state (nonfinal Office
action, p. 2) that Alexander clearly shows the structure as
4(...continued)
F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See
also In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed.
Cir. 1983).
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007