Appeal 2006-2288
Application 10/846,942
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejections and enter a new ground of
rejection of claims 17-19.
New ground of rejection
The following new ground of rejection is entered under
37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
as failing to claim the subject matter which the Appellants regard as the
invention.
The Appellants’ Specification indicates that the Appellants’ inventive
method requires 1) a bristle head having bristles extending therefrom, and
2) a strand frame having strands extending across it (Spec. ¶¶ 0025, 0028).
In accordance with the Specification, claim 1 recites that the brushing
element “includes a bristle head and a multiplicity of bristles extending from
said bristle head” and that the cleaning element “includes a frame and
strands extending across said frame”. Claim 17, however, recites a bristle
head and a strand frame, but does not recite that the bristle head has bristles
extending therefrom or that the strand frame has strands extending across it.
Claim 17 recites “said bristles” but does not provide antecedent basis
therefor. That claim recites lifting up debris “that has collected on said
strand frame”, but what the Specification discloses is that the debris collects
on strands (Spec. ¶ 0030). The Specification does not state that debris
collects on the strand frame.
Claim 17 therefore, as well as its dependent claims 18 and 19 that do
not remedy the above-discussed defect in claim 17, are rejected under
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013