Appeal No. 1998-2089
Application 08/443,507
THE ISSUE
The issue presented for review is whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims
1, 3 through 7, 9 through 14, 17, 19 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
based on a non-enabling disclosure.
DELIBERATIONS
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation and review of the
following materials: (1) the instant specification, including all of the claims on appeal; (2)
applicants’ Appeal Brief and Reply Brief before the board; (3) the Examiner’s Answer
(Paper No. 15); and (4) the communication from the examiner mailed February 13, 1998
(Paper No. 19).
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed materials, we affirm the
examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
DISCUSSION
We find no error in the examiner’s determination that applicants’ specification
does not teach those skilled in the art how to use the full scope of the claimed invention
without undue experimentation. On reflection, we agree with the position ably and
thoroughly presented in the Examiner’s Answer including (1) the statement of rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, and (2) the response to applicants’ arguments
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007