Appeal No. 2003-0663
Application No. 09/072,549
sent out via port 845 and Audio/Video I/O port 805 onto AV
Network 901. Appellants contend that these teachings show that
the transmission of TV-quality video over UTP is accomplished by
this video communications system having an Audio/Video (A/V)
transceiver as shown in Figure 19.
It appears to us that appellants have given a reasonable
explanation as to how the TV-quality transmission is accomplished
while the examiner merely asserts that the specification merely
recites a desire to have “TV-quality” video without an adequate
disclosure as to how to accomplish this. On balance, it does not
appear to us that the examiner has made a reasonable finding to
doubt the objective truth of appellants’ statements as to how TV-
quality transmission is effected. Since we find no sufficient
reason to doubt appellants’ disclosure and statements, as well as
the statements in the Ludwig declaration, we will not sustain the
rejection of claims 1-5, 7-11, 21-25 and 27-31 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph.
When a rejection is made on the basis that the disclosure
lacks enablement, it is incumbent upon the examiner to explain
why he/she doubts the truth or accuracy of any statement in a
supporting disclosure and to back up assertions with acceptable
evidence or reasoning which is inconsistent with the contested
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007