Appeal No. 2006-2268
Application No. 10/468,448
in which the radicals R , R ,R , and R each1 2 3 4
independently of one another are hydrogen atoms or
alkyl, cycloalkyl, alkylcycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl,
aryl, alkylaryl, cycloalkylaryl, arylalkyl or
arylcycloalkyl radicals, with the proviso that at
least two of the variables R , R , R , and R are aryl,1 2 3 4
arylalkyl or arylcycloalkyl radicals; and
(B) at least one polyisocyanate.
Upon careful review of the respective positions advanced
by Appellants and the Examiner, we reverse all of the above
stated rejections.
35 U.S.C. § 112, SECOND PARAGRAPH REJECTION
Claims 13 and 14 stand rejected under the second paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as indefinite.
“The legal standard for definiteness [under the second
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112] is whether a claim reasonably
appraises those of skill in the art of its scope.” In re
Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361, 31 USPQ2d 1754, 1759 (Fed. Cir.
1994). The inquiry is to determine whether the claim sets out
and circumscribes a particular area with a reasonable degree of
precision and particularity. The definiteness of the language
employed in a claim must be analyzed not in a vacuum, but in
light of the teachings of the particular application. In re
Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235, 169 USPQ 236, 238 (CCPA 1971).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007