Appeal No. 2002-2169 Page 7
Application No. 09/163,286
transmissions, or those transmissions can be used to measure the local clock's errors.
The argument does not allege, let alone show, that the meaning of "provide a
calibration signal" is clear. Therefore, we affirm the indefiniteness rejection of claim 12.
Written Description Rejections of Claims 6 and 12
Regarding claim 6, the examiner asserts, "the specification does not make clear
how the 'observations of a plurality of phase differences . . . at a plurality of . . . signal
frequencies' provides a limitation to 'measuring a time difference . . . using a reference
time base obtained from said local reference clock'." (Examiner's Answer at 3.) He
further asserts, "[r]egarding claim 12, the specification does not sufficiently describe
how a phase measurement device operates on the time difference from which a
distance to target measurement can be computed after correcting for frequency
offset determined in software." (Id.)
"The claims as filed are part of the specification, and may provide or contribute to
compliance with Section 112." Hyatt v. Boone, 146 F3d 1348, 1352, 47 USPQ2d 1128,
1130 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (citing Northern Telecom, Inc. v. Datapoint Corp., 908 F.2d 931,
938, 15 USPQ2d 1321, 1326 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Benno, 768 F.2d 1340, 1346, 226
USPQ 683, 686-87 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Frey, 166 F.2d 572, 575, 77 USPQ 116, 119
(CCPA 1948)). More specifically, "disclosure in an originally filed claim satisfies the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007