Appeal No. 2002-0234
Application No. 09/496,087
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.
Nor do we see any reason to conclude that claims 1 through 4
are in any way incomplete. The forklift apparatus broadly set
forth therein includes a wheeled frame (82) pivotally secured to
the forward end of a tractor (12), a connecting means (28), a
material handling attachment (120) mounted on the wheeled frame
and a length adjustable member (76) for bringing the wheels on
the wheeled frame into and out of contact with the ground as
needed or desired. Based on appellant's disclosure, it is
readily apparent that it is the "material handling attachment"
(120) which incorporates the elements of concern to the examiner
(i.e., a base mast section (122), a carriage or movable mast
section (124) moved by motive means, tines (144), etc.). Again,
we note that breadth alone does not equate to indefiniteness.
In addition, with regard to the examiner's assertion of
"improper alternate claiming," after reviewing appellant's
specification and claim 1 in light thereof, it is our opinion
that the examiner's criticism of the alternative language used in
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007