Appeal 2006-3004
Application 10/796,708
1 Sarkisian discloses a bar b having a mounting flange formed integral
2 with the ends of the bar (p. 1, l. 73). The mounting flange has tabs or feet b'
3 (p. 1, ll 68 to 74). Each of the tabs or feet b' has a hole for receiving screws
4 2 (p. 1, ll 75 to 80).
5 Guenther discloses a bathroom support bar that includes flanges 14
6 and 16 with covers 18 and 20 (col. 2, lines 11 to 14). The cover is provided
7 to conceal the flange (col. 1, lines 11 to 13).
8 DISCUSSION
9 Indefiniteness
10 We initially note that the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112
11 requires claims to set out and circumscribe a particular area with a
12 reasonable degree of precision and particularity. In re Johnson, 558 F.2d
13 1008, 1015, 194 USPQ 187, 193 (CCPA 1977). In making this
14 determination, the definiteness of the language employed in the claims must
15 be analyzed, not in a vacuum, but always in light of the teachings of the
16 prior art and of the particular application disclosure as it would be
17 interpreted by one possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art.
18 Id.
19 The examiner's focus during examination of claims for compliance
20 with the requirement for definiteness of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
21 is whether the claims meet the threshold requirements of clarity and
22 precision, not whether more suitable language or modes of expression are
23 available. Some latitude in the manner of expression and the aptness of
24 terms is permitted even though the claim language is not as precise as the
25 examiner might desire. If the scope of the invention sought to be patented
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013