Appeal No. 1998-2848
Application 08/398,862
any case, it is not known what is meant by either phrase and
we find no description of either phrase in the specification.
We reverse the § 101 rejection of claims 21-37. Where
the claimed subject matter is indefinite, an evaluation
thereof relative to statutory subject matter is inappropriate.
Cf. In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385, 165 USPQ 494, 496 (CCPA
1970) ("If no reasonably definite meaning can be ascribed to
certain terms in the claim, the subject matter does not become
obvious--the claim becomes indefinite); In re Steele,
305 F.2d 859, 862, 134 USPQ 292, 295 (CCPA 1962) ("[O]ur
analysis of the claims leaves us in a quandry as to what is
covered by them. We think the examiner and the board were
wrong in relying on what at best are speculative assumptions
as to the meaning of the claims and basing a rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103 thereon.").
Independent claim 38 and dependent claim 39
System claim 38 recites "said ETC including a display
system, a housing, software, a battery, a CPU, and an LCD
display." Thus, system claim 38 recites physical structure
which has not been addressed by the Examiner. Although
claim 38 does not recite that the ETC data structure is
- 16 -
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007