Appeal No. 2003-0231 Page 4
Application No. 09/749,372
Claims are considered to be definite, as required by the second paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112, when they define the metes and bounds of a claimed invention with a
reasonable degree of precision and particularity. See In re Venezia, 530 F.2d 956, 958,
189 USPQ 149, 151 (CCPA 1976).
Claim 4 includes the limitation "the compartment for the at least one sheet of
paper being adapted to control information on the at least one sheet of paper as related
to the microscope slides."
In this rejection, the examiner (answer, p. 3) stated that the phrase "being
adapted to control information on the at least one sheet of paper as related to the
microscope slides" is vague, confusing and indefinite since it has no clear meaning as
to how the compartment is adapted to control information on the sheet.
The appellant argues (brief, p. 7) that this rejection is improper since functional
language is permitted in claims and the claims have sufficient structure so that the
functional language serves to clarify the claims.
In our view, the metes and bounds of the limitation "the compartment for the at
least one sheet of paper being adapted to control information on the at least one sheet
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007