Ex Parte Nomula - Page 4

               Appeal 2007-0656                                                                            
               Application 10/653,584                                                                      
               Rejection,” Appellant requested that the appeal be maintained in his Reply                  
               Brief (Reply Br. 1).                                                                        

               35 U.S.C. § 112, 1st PARAGRAPH, REJECTION FOR LACK OF                                       
               WRITTEN DESCRIPTION FOR THE ADDED PHRASE “THINNER                                           
               THAN THE INNER LAYER”                                                                       
                      Appellant argues that Figure 2 provides descriptive support for the                  
               claim feature that the “peel-seal layer is thinner than the inner layer” (Br.               
               4-6).                                                                                       
                      We cannot sustain the Examiner’s § 112, 1st paragraph, written                       
               description rejection concerning the claim phrase “is thinner than the inner                
               layer” for the reasons below.                                                               
                      Generally, features clearly shown by patent drawings cannot be                       
               disregarded.  In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 1072, 173 USPQ 25, 27 (CCPA                        
               1972).  In addition, when assessing whether a drawing provides descriptive                  
               support for a claim feature the “legitimate enquiry in each case . . . is what              
               the drawing in fact discloses to one skilled in the art.”  In re Wolfensperger,             
               302 F.2d 950, 955, 133 USPQ 537, 542 (CCPA 1962).  Figures that                             
               consistently show the same relative proportions cannot be ignored.                          
               Wolfensperger, 302 F.2d at 959, 133 USPQ at 545.                                            
                      Appellant’s Figure 2 clearly demonstrates that the relative dimension                
               (i.e., thickness) of the peel-seal layer is thinner than the inner layer.  This             
               particular disclosure by Appellant in his drawings cannot be disregarded.                   
               Mraz, 455 F.2d at 1072, 173 USPQ at 27.  Moreover, Figures 2 and 3                          
               consistently show the same relative proportions for the various layers in the               
               closure (30) and cannot be ignored. Wolfensperger,  302 F.2d at 959, 133                    
               USPQ at 545.                                                                                

                                                    4                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013