Ex Parte BIEMAN - Page 16




                  Appeal No. 2004-0659                                                                                           
                  Application No. 09/111,978                                                                                     


                                  45.    The examiner reasoned as follows (see Examiner’s Answer entered                         
                  July 31, 2003, pages 3-4) (Italic emphasis added)(Bold emphasis in original):                                  
                                  The following ground(s) of rejection are applicable to the appealed claims:                    
                                  A. Claims 30-85 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being an improper                          
                          recapture of broadened claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for                       
                          the patent upon which the present reissue is based. See Hester Industries, Inc. v.                     
                          Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Clement,                            
                          131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir: 1997); Ball Corp. v. United States;                           
                          729 F.2d 1429, 1436, 221 USPQ 289, 295 (Fed. Cir. 1984).                                               
                                  a. Regarding claims 30, 42, 56, 60, and 72, a broadening aspect is present                     
                          in the reissue which was not present in the application for patent. The record of                      
                          the application for the patent shows that the broadening aspect (in the reissue)                       
                          relates to subject matter that applicant previously surrendered during the                             
                          prosecution of the application. Accordingly, the narrow scope of the claims in the                     
                          patent was not an error within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 251, and the broader                           
                          scope surrendered in the application for the patent cannot be recaptured by the                        
                          filing of the present reissue application.                                                             
                                  In the original application (08/593,095), applicants’ amendment filed on                       
                          11/18/96 inserted the limitations “at a substantially constant velocity”, “which                       
                          are substantially uniformly spaced”, and “maintaining the at least one projector                       
                          and the detector in a substantially fixed relation to each other” into claims 1 and                    
                          14 to overcome the rejection. In the remarks, applicant stated that these                              
                          limitations are distinct from the prior art. However, in the present reissue                           
                          application, these limitations are omitted in the new independent claims 30, 42,                       
                          56, 60, and 72. Thus, these claims constitute improper recapture of broadened                          
                          claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent upon which                        
                          the present reissue is based even though it may be narrower in other respects.                         
                                  b. Claims 31-41, 43-55, 57-59, 61-71 and 73-85 are dependent claims;                           
                          therefore, inherit the deficiencies of the claims on which they depend.                                
                                  46.    The examiner entered a final rejection of claims 30 through 85 on                       
                  June 22, 2001.                                                                                                 
                                  47.    The record supports the Examiner’s findings with respect to what                        
                  limitations do not appear in reissue application claims 30 through 85, which were present                      
                  in claims 1 and 14 of the original application, as amended.                                                    

                                                             - 16 -                                                              





Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007