Appeal No. 1998-1053
Application No. 07/974,832
pressure of the foamed furnish." Given the paucity of examples
and disclosure in appellant's specification concerning exactly
what the various parameters referenced in these claim
recitations may be, or are intended to encompass, we find that
we are at a loss to understand exactly what a parameter
"determinative" of density or pressure of the foamed furnish
is, relative to a parameter that is "directly determinative"
of density or pressure of the foamed furnish, and how such
recitations in any meaningful way are different than the step
of simply measuring the density and pressure of the foamed
furnish or directly measuring the density and pressure of the
foamed furnish as in claims 14 and 30. In this regard, we
also again make note of the conflicting arguments put forth by
appellant in the reply brief and by appellant's counsel at the
oral hearing of July 11, 2000 concerning what may be included
or excluded by the term "determinative." Allowed claims 31
and 32, and claims 35 through 37 on appeal suffer from similar
problems to those noted in the claims immediately above. In
independent claim 29, we are similarly at a loss to understand
exactly what is meant by "a parameter determinative of the
velocity of the moving foraminous support" and what is meant
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007