Appeal No. 2003-1081
Application 08/581,347
For the reasons discussed above, the appellant’s claims are
sufficiently indefinite that application of the prior art to the
claims is not possible. On this basis, we do not sustain the
rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(b) or 103. It should be
understood that this reversal is not a reversal on the merits of
the rejections but, rather, is a procedural reversal predicated
upon the indefiniteness of the claims.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 38 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, is reversed. The rejections of claims 21-27,
29, 31-37, 40 and 41-43 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over
Cathey, Jr., claim 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Cathey, Jr. in
view of Meyer, and claims 21 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Cathey, Jr. in view of Horiuchi, are procedurally reversed.
Under 37 CFR § 1.196(b), a new ground of rejection of claims 21-
40 has been entered.
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to
37 CFR § 1.196(b). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides that, “A new
ground of rejection shall not be considered final for purposes of
judicial review.”
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007