Appeal No. 97-3290
Application 08/465,896
cover surfactants that will work. Nevertheless, as recognized
by appellant, the claims require determination of the
effective agents based upon the disclosed “Surface-Active
Agent Effectiveness Test”. As explained above, the
requirement of the subjective odor specialist determination,
forming an essential part of the test required by claim 21,
would not have enabled one of ordinary skill to practice the
now claimed invention.
The § 112, second paragraph rejection
We affirm this rejection.
In assessing the indefiniteness issue raised in this
appeal, we keep in mind the following principles. Relative to
the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, the
court in In re Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 1382, 166 USPQ 204, 208
(CCPA 1970) stated that
[i]ts purpose is to provide those who would
endeavor, in future enterprise, to approach
the area circumscribed by the claims of a
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007