Appeal No. 1998-1814 Page 8
Application No. 08/347,814
110 and 143, we find claim 143 to be definite. Claim 143 does
not recite that the detector means comprises a single
detector. Claim 143 simply states that a single detector
means produces the output signal representative of the
absorber series. Claim 143 does not preclude the detector
means including other detectors which output signals for
wavelength stabilization. Accordingly, we see no
inconsistency between claim 143 and claim 110. As claim 177
contains similar language to claim 143, we also find claim 177
to be definite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
Nonetheless, as none of the claims dependent upon claims 110
and 144 make up for the indefiniteness of claims 110 and 144,
the rejection of claims 110-177 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, is affirmed.
We now turn to the rejections of claims 110-114, 117-148,
and 151-177 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. At the outset, we note
that at the Oral Hearing, appellants conceded the obviousness
of all of the claims rejected by the examiner, with the
exception of claims 121 and 155. We therefore affirm the
rejection of the remaining claims rejected by the examiner under 35
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007