Appeal No. 2000-0581 Application No. 08/429,155 In light of the foregoing, we shall not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 3-8, 10, 12-22 and 24-28. REMAND TO THE EXAMINER The application is remanded to the examiner for consideration of the following. In reviewing appellant's claims and specification, we note the use of claim terminology such as "attaching device(s)" for mounting replaceable fan blade tip(s) (claims 1 and 28), "aligning means for aligning [the fan blade tips with the fan blades]" (all claims), "mounting device for receiving a fan blade tip" (claim 22) and "fastening means for fastening the replaceable fan blade tip to the fan blade" (claim 28). The sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 states: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. Neither the examiner nor appellant has indicated, on the record, whether any of the above-cited claim recitations invokes the sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. In any event, even if these limitations are interpreted as falling under the 10Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007