Appeal 2007-0144
Application 09/846,907
procedure, the display means displays information regarding t he
mobile station requesting authentication to a LAN adminis trator
for final authorization of the authentication procedure when the
mobile station is in the area inresponse to a notification of the
presence of the authentication requesting mobile station, and
wherein an authentication-authorizing or rejecting instruction
for the mobile station displayed by the display means can be
entered via the input means by the network administrator.
B. REJECTIONS
Cl s 1 and 2 stand rejected uaim nder 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated
by U.S . Patent No. 5,539,824 ("Bjorklun d"). We reject the same claims as
indefinite under 35U.S.C. § 112, ¶2. Our opinion address es the rejections in
the following order:
• indef initeness rejection
• antic ipation rejection.
II. INDEFINITENESS REJECTION
Under 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) (2006), we enter a new rejection against
claims 1 and 2.
A. PRINCIPLES OF LAW
The second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires that a specification
conclude "with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinc tly
claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention."
"The legal standard for definiteness is whether a claim reasonably apprises
those of skill in the art of its scope." In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361,
31 USPQ2d 1754, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (citing Amgen Inc. v. Chugai
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013