Appeal No. 2001-1682
Application No. 08/837,668
base plate and an attachment block" as required in independent
claims 1 and 14 on appeal. In this regard, appellant urges that
the use of attachment blocks as specifically seen in Figures 13
through 20 of the present application is not disclosed by Rice
'140. In the answer (Paper No. 23, page 4), the examiner again
points to the receiving means (60) of Rice '140 urging that "the
rejection is based on the breadth of the claims" and that it is
believed that the receiving means of Rice '140 shows a plate and
eyelet (62) which "read on the claims as broadly recited."
Each of independent claims 1 and 14 on appeal includes a
recitation of "receiving means for engagement by the attaching
means, the receiving means comprising a base plate and an
attachment block, the base plate being surface mounted in an
impenetrable manner to the entry structure by a chemical bonding
means." In understanding this limitation and the claim as a
whole we believe that resort to appellant's specification is
necessary, particularly with respect to the recitation directed
to "an attachment block." In our opinion, the term "attachment
block" as used in the claims on appeal is a coined term and,
absent resort to appellant's specification, does not itself
impart a clear understanding of what structure is being set forth
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007