Appeal No. 2000-1019
Application No. 08/623,852
fall together and reasons in support thereof” (Answer, Paper No.
19, page 2). Claims 14 through 17 also stand or fall together for
the same reason (id).
For this reason, we limit our discussion to independent claim
1 in addressing the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Accordingly, claims 2 through
13 stand or fall together with independent claim 1 on the
respective issues of new matter and obviousness. In addressing the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, we will limit
our discussion to independent claims 1 and 14. Accordingly, claims
2 through 13 stand or fall together with independent claim 1, while
claims 15 through 17 stand or fall with independent claim 14, on
this issue of indefiniteness.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth below, we affirm each of the
rejections before us on appeal.
REJECTION OF CLAIMS 1 THROUGH 17
UNDER 35 U.S.C. §112, 2nd PARAGRAPH
One of the purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, “is
to provide those who would endeavor, in future enterprise, to
approach the area circumscribed by the claims of a patent, with
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007