Appeal No. 2000-0180
Application No. 08/539,943
Claims 5 through 8 and 14 are rejected 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. In particular, we
observe that there is no proper antecedent basis in claim 5
for “said catheter” or “said medical catheter” as set forth in
line 2 of claim 5. We also remind appellant of the need to
amend claim 7 to overcome the lack of a proper antecedent
basis for “said guidewire lumen” in that claim.
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection of one
or more claims, this decision contains a new ground of
rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec.
1, 1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197
(Oct. 10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 63,
122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides that “[a]
new ground of rejection shall not be considered final for
purposes of judicial review.”
Regarding any affirmed rejection, 37 CFR § 1.197(b)
provides:
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007