Appeal No. 95-2440
Application 07/705,726
an adequate written description of the invention, including
how to make and/or use the invention, in the specification;
(2) Claims 72 through 92 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as lacking descriptive support for the invention as
is now claimed in the original specification;
(3) Claims 46 through 50, 52, 57 through 61, 63 and 72
through 98 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and
distinctly claim the subject matter which applicants regard as
their invention;
(4) Claims 46 through 50, 52, 57 through 61, 63 and 72
through 98 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as being anticipated by
appellants' admissions on pages 19 through 21 of the
specification; and
(5) Claims 46 through 50, 52, 57 through 61, 63 and 72
through 98 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Curran in view of Wehner, Potts and Wolf.
Having reviewed the entire record, including the
specification, claims, prior art, appellants' brief and reply
brief, and the examiner's answer, we shall:
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007