Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 DECEMBER 2016

Ex Parte Miyazaki : Claims Are Indefinite When ‘Amenable To Two Or More Plausible' Constructions

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

The main issue on appeal related to claims rejected by the Examiner on novelty and obviousness grounds.

United StatesIntellectual Property

PTAB Decision

Ex parte Miyazaki, Appeal 2007-3300 (November 19, 2008)

Background

The main issue on appeal related to claims rejected by the Examiner on novelty and obviousness grounds.  The Board did not reach the merits of these rejections, but instead entered new grounds of rejection for indefiniteness and lack of enablement.  The technology involved a large printer that uses roll paper; the claims recited: "a sheet feeding area operable to feed at least one roll of paper, at least one sheet of paper and at least one stiff carton toward a printing unit."  The Board concluded that, read in light of the specification, "a sheet feeding area" could have two plausible definitions (the area into which the paper is rolled or the area where the paper rests for feeding), neither of which was consistent with the other claims.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from