Appeal No. 2002-1481
Application No. 09/005,836
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Pressler et al 5,550,713 Aug. 27, 1996
(Pressler)
Persson et al 5,672,844 Sep. 30, 1997
(Persson)
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1 through 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Pressler in view of Persson.
The full text of the examiner’s rejection and response to
the argument presented by appellants appears in the answer (Paper
No. 19), while the complete statement of appellants’ argument can
be found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 18 and 21).
OPINION
We cannot resolve the obviousness issue on its merits since
the claims on appeal are indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as more fully explained below. In a case such as the
present one, where claims contain unclear language which renders
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007