Appeal No. 2003-1572
Application No. 09/661,747
invention can be derived from a reading of claims 7-9, which appear
in the appendix to appellant’s brief.
The examiner relies on the following references as evidence of
obviousness:
Kellogg 5,976,099 Nov. 2, 1999
Chuang 6,026,330 Feb. 15, 2000
Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite.
Claims 7-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kellogg in view of Chuang.
Reference is made to appellant’s brief (Paper No. 8) and to
the examiner’s answer (Paper No. 9) for the respective positions of
appellant and the examiner regarding the merits of these
rejections.
The 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection
Claim 14 is directed to a therapeutic compress pillow
comprising a fabric enclosure, wherein the enclosure comprises “a
garment or a portion thereof.” The examiner considers that claim
14 is indefinite because, in the examiner’s view, it is not clear
what is meant by the term “a portion thereof.”
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires claims to set
out and circumscribe a particular area with a reasonable degree of
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007