Appeal No. 2001-0737 Page 5
Application No. 08/766,212
The indefiniteness rejection
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 to 35, 53
to 55, 62 to 73 and 80 to 95 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires claims
to set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity. In re
Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA 1977).
In making this determination, the definiteness of the language
employed in the claims 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. Id.
The examiner's focus during examination of claims for
compliance with the requirement for definiteness of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, is whether the claims meet the
threshold requirements of clarity and precision, not whether
more suitable language or modes of expression are available.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007