Appeal No. 2004-1621 Page 2
Application No. 08/653,425
mouse is moved on a surface, the ball rotates the shafts. Because of friction between
the ball and the wheel, assert the appellants, the mouse often sticks, and the wheel
requires cleaning. (Substitute Spec. at 2.)
In contrast, the appellants’ mouse employs a magnet and a ball having a
magnetically sensitive core. As shown in Figure 2 of their specification, the magnet
creates a force that pulls the ball against X- and Y-coordinate shafts of the mouse.
Because the magnet does not touch the ball, no friction is created therebetween. (Id. at
3.)
A further understanding of the invention can be achieved by reading the only
claim, which follows:
1. A computer mouse characterized by using a magnet, to pull the rubber
magnetic core ball against the coordinates X and Y shafts2 only; and
there is no third, or any other contact between the ball and any
other part of the mouse, especially no third contact between the ball and
another wheel (Fig. 2).
2 We cannot help but notice the claim's lack of antecedent basis for the limitations
of "the rubber magnetic core ball" (emphasis added) and "the coordinates X and Y
shafts" (emphasis added). See M.P.E.P. § 2173.05(e). The examiner and the
appellants may wish to assess the definiteness of the claim in view of these problems.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007