Appeal No. 2000-0078
Application No. 08/837,242
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 the present case, the examiner contends that claim 26 does
not comply with § 112, second paragraph, because “[i]t is not
clear what structure applicant’s limitation of `drive means, .
. . for
operably controlling movement of said keeper’ refers to”
(final rejection, page 3), and the specification “does not
allow the
exact scope and meaning of the claimed ‘drive means’ to be
determined” (answer, page 3).
We do not agree with the examiner. As pointed out by
appellant on page 8 of the brief, page 6 of the specification,
lines 2 and 3, discloses that motor 64 has an output drive
shaft 66 operatively connected to keeper 48 via reduction gear
set 68. We also note that it is disclosed in lines 20 to 23
of the same page that operation of the motor causes the keeper
48 to selectively engage the cam member 26 to lock the sash 12
in a closed position, and in lines 2 to 6 of page 8 that motor
64 is controlled by control 120 to raise and lower the keeper
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007