Appeal No. 2001-2543
Application No. 09/225,892
our opinion that the scope and content of the subject matter
embraced by the claims on appeal is reasonably clear and
definite, and fulfills the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph. In determining whether a claim sets out and
circumscribes a particular area with a reasonable degree of
precision and particularity, the definiteness of the language
employed in the claim 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.
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 claims 1 and 21 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, and
that one of ordinary skill in the art would clearly understand
what is claimed.
More particularly, one skilled in the art would perceive
that the weight member of the present invention must be
positioned on the cylinder at a location directly opposite the
diver and secured such that the diver cannot remove or release
66
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007