Appeal No. 1999-1716 Page 4
Application No. 08/888,005
having an aperture at the center, a rotatable flexible drive
member placed within the aperture at the center of the joint,
and first and second rotary drive members connected to the
rotatable flexible drive member for transmitting rotary motion
between the first and second rotary drive members while
allowing them to flex relative to one another about the flex
point. From the original disclosure, it is clear that the
“rotatable flexible drive member” includes elements commonly
known as constant velocity joints, universal joints, and
flexible cables such as have been used in speedometers.
The Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 112, Second Paragraph
It is the examiner’s view that the claims are rendered
indefinite because “merely naming elements adds no structure to
the claims” (Answer, page 4). The examiner applies this to the
joint and to the various drive means as they are recited in
claims 13, 14, 22, 23, 25 and 26. We do not agree with this
conclusion. From our perspective, the terminology used in the
claims is broad, but it is not indefinite, for one of ordinary
skill in the art would have no trouble understanding the
meaning of the terms and the interrelationship of the elements
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007