Appeal No. 2005-1268
Application No. 10/044,728
37 CFR 41.50(b), against claims 1, 5-10, 13, 15, and 17.
Claims 1, 5-10, 13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112, second
paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
regarded by applicant as his invention.
Each of independent claims 1, 13, 15, and 17 recites a single threshold of speed
and then goes on to recite “a series of different changes in presentation...” In
accordance with our understanding of the invention, as disclosed, e.g., page 11 of the
specification, there can only be “a series of different changes in presentation...” if there
are multiple thresholds. A single threshold can only result in a single change of
presentation, as in Shinichiro. Since these claims recite only a single threshold, such a
single threshold cannot support the further recitation of “a series of different changes in
presentation...” Both of these recitations appearing in a single claim fail to particularly
point out and distinctly claim the disclosed invention.
With regard to independent claims 11 and 16, these claims also stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. §102 (b), but these claims include the limitation of “multiple thresholds.”
So, while we will also not sustain the rejection of these claims under
35 U.S.C. §102 (b) because Shinichiro does not disclose multiple thresholds, or “a
series of different changes,” as claimed, claims 11 and 16 are not subject to the new
ground of rejection because these claims contain the “multiple thresholds” limitation to
support the recitation of “a series of different changes.”
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007