Indefiniteness rejection stands in Ex parte Schnoerer
We are not persuaded by Appellants’ argument that a feature per se is
among the enumerated categories of invention. The recited “feature” is
analogous to the “paradigm” in Ferguson:
Applicants’ paradigm claims force us to consider whether the
claimed subject matter fits into any of the four enumerated
categories of statutory subject matter. Although we need not
resolve the particular class of statutory subject matter into
which Applicants’ paradigm claims fall, the claims must satisfy
at least one category.
In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1365 (Fed Cir 2009).