Appeal No. 1997-1351
Application 08/127,924
and because "[i]t is unclear whether this is a separate unit
and what other elements it contains beside the controller"
(FR3).
Appellants argue that it is not necessary to state the
function of the interface module or what other elements the
interface module contains (Br5-6).
The interface module is a broad limitation because it
recites no function or other elements, but this does not
make it vague or indefinite. Claim breadth should not be
confused with indefiniteness. See In re Miller,
441 F.2d 689, 693, 169 USPQ 597, 600 (CCPA 1971). Because
no function or other elements are recited for the interface
module, a controller alone could be an interface module.
The rejection of claims 21, 23, 26, and 28 is reversed.
Claims 24 and 40
The Examiner states that these "claims do not recite
the apparatus which will enable the operation of processors
using the coupling elements, for example the control lines"
(FR3).
- 13 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007