Appeal No. 1999-0944
Application No. 08/890,252
with appellants that one of ordinary skill in the art would
appreciate that the inventive apparatus disclosed in the
patent utilizes first and second carriage members.
In light of the foregoing, we will not sustain the
standing rejection of reissue claims 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph.
Remand to the Examiner
Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(e), this application is
remanded to the examiner to consider the following issues:
(1) Do reissue claims 1-4, which are directed to an
apparatus for inserting the spread-apart leading-
edge sheath in combination with a blade subassembly,
particularly point out and distinctly claim the
subject matter which appellants regard as their
invention, as required by the second paragraph of 35
U.S.C. § 112? 6
5(...continued)
60L along the spanwise length thereof . . . . The suction cups
66U, 66L are operative to engage and hold the respective OML
surfaces of the leading edge sheath 120 with the vacuum source 68
actuated. Subsequent synchronized movement of the respective
carriage members 60U, 60L away from one another to the operating
position causes spreading of the sheath 120 to facilitate
insertion thereof in combination with the blade subassembly 132.
6 It is fundamental that the description requirement found in the first
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 and the definiteness requirement found in the
second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 are separate and distinct. Accordingly,
just because claim language may have been properly “described” in the
disclosure as originally filed, it does not necessarily follow that that claim
(continued...)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007