Appeal No. 2006-1853 Page 5
Application No. 10/051,573
bottom surface 24 of the chassis 48, defines the first
mounting pathway 18.
It is our opinion that this description in the specification would clearly
indicate to those skilled in the art that the “chassis” is a housing that holds or
otherwise supports the components of the device, and the “device” is the
combination of the chassis and the components (not shown) therein. As such, we
reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
With respect to claim 15, the examiner noted in the final office action, “the
function for the ‘cabinet means’ and ‘housing means’ have not been properly set
forth,” because the word “defining” does not recite a proper function. As such, the
examiner read these elements as being merely a “cabinet” and a “housing.” (Final
Office Action, p. 2). The examiner did not, however, reiterate this interpretation in
his answer on appeal. Because the interpretation of the claims under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, sixth paragraph, affects the scope of the claims for purposes of the ensuing
rejections, we address the interpretation of the “means for” elements of claim 15.
We agree with the examiner that the recitations of “cabinet means” and
“housing means” do not properly invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph. We
also find that the “device means” recitation does not properly invoke 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, sixth paragraph for the reasons set forth below. We base our interpretation,
however, on different grounds than the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007