Appeal No. 1999-1517
Application No. 08/837,523
We affirm.
We will consider the two rejections separately.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, fist paragraph
Claims 11 through 30 are rejected for failing to provide
an adequate written description of the invention (answer at
page 3). According to the examiner, the specification as
originally filed
does not provide adequate support for the phrase “without
driving essentially any dopant of the first conductivity type
through the insulating layer” see independent claims 11 and
30, id.
The written description requirement serves “to ensure
that the inventor had possession, as of the filing date of the
application relied on, of the specific subject matter later
claimed by him; how the specification accomplishes this is not
material." In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 262, 191 USPQ 90, 96
(CCPA 1976). In order to meet the written description
requirement, the appellants do not have to utilize any
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007