Appeal No. 2000-2003
Application 08/477,878
precisely what the scope of the claims is. Cf. In re Cohn, 438
F.2d 989, 993, 169 USPQ 95, 98 (CCPA 1971) (claims indefinite in
view of inconsistency between claims and the supporting
disclosure). It is necessary that appellants address this
apparent discrepancy and that it be resolved prior to our
rendering a decision on this appeal.
In reviewing the claims, we note that the handpiece recited
in claim 3, having “the light guide extending through the
handpiece to the head mirror,” is not shown in the drawings as
required by 37 CFR § 1.83(a). Also, the term “headpiece” in
claim 3, line 11, has no antecedent basis in the specification.
37 CFR § 1.75(d)(1).
Time for Response
Appellants are required to file a response addressing
matters (1) and (2) above within two months from the date of this
paper. As provided in 37 CFR § 1.196(d), this time period is
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007