Appeal No. 1997-1409
Application 08/297,399
the flange portion, not the flange and stem means as a
whole.
The Examiner further states that "the area" lacks
antecedent basis (EA6).
As discussed in connection with claim 3, it is not
necessary to provide antecedent basis in this case.
The Examiner further states that the meaning of "with
the area . . . flange means" in claim 6 cannot be
ascertained (EA6).
As stated with respect to the written description
rejection, the limitation and its meaning is fully supported
by figures 2 and 3, as filed.
The Examiner further states that the terms "stem means"
and "flange means" purport to be means-plus-function
limitations under 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, but have
no functional connotations (EA6).
The limitations are not interpreted as means-plus-
function elements since the structures of the "stem means"
and the "flange means" are fully described. There is
nothing wrong with using the term "means" in a non-means-
plus-function way.
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007