Appeal No. 2000-2081
Application 08/656,082
possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art.
See In re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1016 n.17, 194 USPQ 187, 194
n.17 (CCPA 1977). When that standard of evaluation is applied
to the language employed in the claims before us on appeal, we
are of the opinion that those claims set out and circumscribe
a particular area with a reasonable degree of precision and
particularity.
As for the issue regarding the “top sticks” set forth in
claims 8, 9, 21 and 22, we point the examiner to appellants’
disclosure at pages 13-14 wherein both insulation “wedges”
(63) and “top sticks” (64) are described and where it is noted
that “[i]n addition to or in place of the wedge 63, a top
stick 64 may be used to close the opening 63 [sic, 61].”
Thus, since a top stick can be used in addition to a wedge to
close the opening
(61), there would appear to be nothing wrong with appellants’
claiming such a combination of elements as they have done in
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007