Appeal No. 2000-1622
Application No. 08/752,445
The reference applied in the final rejection is:
Groeniger 2,340,323 Feb.
1, 1944
The appealed claims stand finally rejected on the
following grounds:
(1) Claims 66 to 68, 70, 72, 75 and 78 to 85, unpatentable for
failure to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
(2) Claims 66 to 68, 70, 72 and 75 to 86, anticipated by
Groeniger, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
Rejection (1): 35 U.S.C. § 112, Second Paragraph
The essence of examiner’s position with regard to this
rejection is contained in the following quotation from page 6
of the examiner’s answer:
defining the water closet carrier, an
element of the waste discharge system, as
having a width approximately the distance
between the consecutive vertical studs
(claim 66) renders the width of the water
closet carrier indefinite because the studs
are not positively recited elements of the
claimed subject matter. They have merely
been presented as an intended use
environment.
Similarly, defining the width (claims 68,
75, 84, and 85), and height (claims 72, 78, 79,
80, and 85) of the water closet carrier as a
direct relationship to the off-the-floor water
closet as well as distance that the water closet
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007