Appeal No. 1999-1786
Application No. 08/821,738
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant’s specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner.
As a preliminary matter, we note (brief, page 4) that
appellant has stated that "Claims 1-8 stand or fall together."
Accordingly, we will treat claims 1-8 as standing or falling
with independent claim 5, the broader of the two independent
claims.
We first turn to the rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which appellant regards as the invention. The examiner sets
forth (answer, page 3) that, in claim 6, line 2, the
recitation of “said threads” lacks antecedent basis. The
examiner further sets forth that in claim 6, line 3, the
positive recitations of “a steering shaft” and “an outer end”
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007