Ex Parte Spiess - Page 9



          Appeal No. 2006-1692                                        Παγε 9          
          Application No. 10/068,243                                                  

          consistent with the dictionary definition of being constructed of           
          a single piece of material.1 Turning to the term “homogenous,” as           
          the term does not appear at all in the specification, we look to            
          a dictionary for a definition of the term.  Because appellant               
          asserts (brief, page 5) that the examiner has used a dictionary             
          that defines the term in a manner that is incongruous with the              
          disclosure, we again rely upon the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of                
          Scientific and Technical terms for a definition of “homogenous.”            
          The term is defined as pertaining to a substance having uniform             
          composition or structure.2  From the definition of the term                 
          “homogenous” we find that the term is not the same as monolithic,           
          but rather is broader and more encompassing because uniform                 
          composition or structure does not have to be formed from a                  

                                                                                     
               1  McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms, Second Ed., 1969.  A copy of the
          pertinent page is enclosed with the Decision on Appeal.                     
               2  A copy of the definition of the term “homogenous” is also enclosed with the Decision on Appeal.












Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007