Appeal No. 2000-0574
Application No. 08/876,321
Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235, 169 USPQ 236, 238 (CCPA 1971), the
determination of whether the claims of an application satisfy
the requirements of the second paragraph of Section 112 is
merely to determine whether the claims do, in fact,
set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity.
It is here where the definiteness of language
employed must be analyzed -- not in a vacuum, but
always in light of the teachings of the prior art
and of the particular application disclosure as it
would be interpreted by one possessing the ordinary
level of skill in the pertinent art. [Emphasis ours;
footnote omitted.]
We understand the examiner's criticism to be that the
claim does not explicitly state relative to which dimension
(the length, width or thickness) of the base member the length
of the planar side walls is greater. However, from our
perspective, a statement that a first element has a length
greater than a second element is conventionally understood to
mean that the first element has a length which is greater than
the length of the second element. While it may be true that
the claim could be drafted more precisely to state that the
planar side walls have a length greater than the length of
said rectangular base member, it is our opinion that one of
ordinary skill in the art, in light of the underlying
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007