Appeal No. 2003-1336 Page 2
Application No. 09/642,398
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a block system for holding a workpiece in a
clamp. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary
claim 18, which has been reproduced below.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims is:
Hennessey 3,463,478 Aug. 26, 1969
Claims 18-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which
the appellants regard as the invention.
Claims 18-30 further stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Hennessey.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 15) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and
to the Brief (Paper No. 14) and the Reply Brief (Paper No. 16) for the appellants’
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007