Appeal 2007-1325
Application 10/065,722
1 5. New Grounds of Rejection:
2
3 Indefiniteness rejection
4 Claims 84, and claims 85-87 which depend directly or indirectly from
5 claim 8410, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
6 indefinite.
7 Our principal concern with this is Dart's use of the word "chamber" in
8 the claim.
9 While the word chamber appears in some of the original claims, it is
10 not defined in the specification.
11 Accordingly, we give the word its ordinary meaning. One meaning of
12 chamber is: a natural or artificial enclosed space or cavity. Webster’s
13 Collegiate Dictionary Tenth Edition (1996).
14 The Waterbury mounting element is described as having substantially
15 the same shape and depth as the recess into which it placed. Thus, the
16 mounting element and recess do not have to have precisely complimentary
17 shapes. Nor has Dart established that a mounting element and recess made
18 by a thermoforming process would be expected to be precisely
19 complimentary. To the extent that there is any opening between the
20 mounting element and the recess in a device made by a third-party, we do
21 not think Dart is entitled to infringement relief against that party based on
22 the broadest reasonable interpretation of "chamber" in claim 84 and an
23 attempt to maneuver the invention of claim 84 to cover devices falling
10 Claims 40-43, 71-74 while not dependent on claim 84 introduce the10
“chamber” as a dependent claim feature and thus are also subject to the 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph rejection.
32
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013