Ex Parte Harmanoglu - Page 5




              Appeal No. 2002-2136                                                                  Page 5                
              Application No. 09/761,077                                                                                  


              Figure 1, including the uncovered upper strip 28 and horizontally oriented line of                          
              perforations 46 delineating a removable length portion of the upper strip, with a check                     
              bank deposit inserted into one bag compartment and a cash bank deposit inserted into                        
              the other bag compartment.  The second paragraph of the claim, as reproduced supra,                         
              on the other hand, recites steps of a method of using the article recited in the first                      
              paragraph, such as inscribing and removing the removable length portion of the upper                        
              strip and inserting it into the second bag compartment, adhesively closing the second                       
              bag compartment and manually depositing the second bag compartment in a night                               
              bank repository.                                                                                            
                     The purpose of the second paragraph of Section 112 is to basically insure, with a                    
              reasonable degree of particularity, an adequate notification, to those who would                            
              endeavor in the future to approach the area circumscribed by the claims of a patent, of                     
              the metes and bounds of what is being claimed so that they may readily and accurately                       
              evaluate the possibility of infringement and dominance.  See In re Hammack, 427 F.2d                        
              1378, 1382, 166 USPQ 204, 208 (CCPA 1970).  We also note that the statutory class                           
              of invention is important in determining patentability and infringement.  As indicated by                   
              the court in In re Kuehl, 475 F.2d 658, 665, 177 USPQ 250, 255 (CCPA 1973), “each                           
              statutory class of claims must be considered independently on its own merits.”                              











Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007