Appeal No. 1998-1795
Application No. 08/485,682
OPINION
We have considered the rejections advanced by the
Examiner. We have, likewise, reviewed Appellant’s arguments
against the rejections as set forth in the briefs.
We affirm-in-part.
Since there are rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103, we review the
applicable laws before considering the specific rejections.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires claims
to set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity. In re
Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA 1977).
In making this determination, the definiteness of the language
employed in the claims must be analyzed, not in a vacuum, but
always in light of the teachings of the prior art and of the
particular application disclosure as it would be interpreted
by one possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent
art. Id.
The examiner's focus during examination of claims for
compliance with the requirement for definiteness of 35 U.S.C.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007