Appeal No. 1998-3281
Application 08/650,500
appellant's claims reasonably may be said to embrace. See In re
Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385, 165 USPQ 494, 496 (CCPA 1970) ("If
no reasonably definite meaning can be ascribed to certain terms
in the claim, the subject matter does not become obvious the
claim becomes indefinite."). Compare In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859,
862-63, 134 USPQ 292, 295 (CCPA 1962).
Specifically, claim 22 defines a "polymer" selected from two
groups of polymers defined by their formulae. The polymers
denominated as group (a) include a backbone R defined solely as
an "organic group" having two or more carbon atoms in the
repeating unit. One substituent on the backbone is represented
by the substituent C, the universally recognized symbol for
carbon, although C in at least part of appellant's claim does not
stand for carbon! Rather C is stated to be "a hydrophobic
saturated alkyl group having at least about 6 carbon atoms bonded
in a linear chain." The second substituent on the backbone is
represented by the substituent B, the universally recognized
symbol for boron, although B does not stand for boron in the
appealed claims! Rather, B is stated to be a "hydrophilic group
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007