Appeal No. 1997-3090
Application 08/309,280
that the Appellants disclose embodiments in which there are
two members extending from the plate to hold the motor.
On page 3 of the brief, Appellants argue that the claims
do not set forth an ambiguity. Appellants argue that the
claims define one or more members for holding the motor and
meet the requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
Upon our review of the recited language, "at least one
member extending from the plate," we find that the scope of
the claim is clear. The language sets out and circumscribes a
particular area with a reasonable degree of precision and
particularity. We find that the scope of the claim language
would only require one member extending from the plate to hold
the motor. Therefore, we find that the claim language meets
the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
We have not sustained the rejection of claims 5 through
13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. Accordingly, the
Examiner's decision is reversed.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
We remand this application to the Examiner for
consideration of the following matters. On page 3 of the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007