Appeal No. 1999-1987 Page 36
Application No. 08/400,129
respect to claim 24, we consider this claim to be indefinite
since it depends from canceled claim 23. Thus, it is unclear
to us which, if any, limitations are being incorporated by
reference. With respect to claim 26, we consider this claim
to be indefinite since there is no antecedent basis for "said
twisting preventing means." Thus, it is unclear to us if the
appellant intended to include a twisting preventing means in
the claimed combination or intended to refer to another
element (e.g., nonresilient tether portion).
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 1 to 11, 25 and 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed;
the decision of the examiner to reject claims 17 to 22 and 26
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed; and a new rejection of
claims 24 and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, has
been added pursuant to provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection of one
or more claims, this decision contains a new ground of
rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b). 37 CFR § 1.196(b)
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007