Appeal No. 1999-0933 Page 9
Application No. 08/512,396
of termination of control of motion characteristics of said vehicle by the vehicle
motion characteristics controlling means. Thus, we have remanded the application to
the examiner so that this issue can be addressed and resolved before the examiner.
While the paper filed by appellants on October 19, 2000 (Paper No. 22),
subsequent to the oral hearing in this case, is not provided for in the Rules (37 CFR),
we will nonetheless comment on appellants' position set forth therein because it will
serve to advance the prosecution of this application. Notwithstanding, the disclosure
on page 14 of the specification pointed to by appellants, we remain of the view above
that claim 1 on appeal appears to be inaccurate. Claim 1, lines 9-11, define the
second switching valve as being "switchable to a communicated position and to an
interrupted position." The mere fact that the interrupted position may also provide
some communication to the master cylinder (34) and reservoir (68) under some
circumstances as set forth on page 14 of appellants' specification does not change
the fact that the valve (e.g., 50FL) is in its interrupted position during operation of the
termination controlling means as clearly set forth on pages 19 and 20 of the
specification and not "at said communicated position" as presently set forth in claim 1
on appeal.
This application, by virtue of its “special” status requires an immediate action.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007