Appeal No. 95-4860
Application No. 08/044,923
Considering first the rejection of claims 12-22 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, the examiner is of the
opinion that there is no descriptive support for the
recitation of the anchor being “removably supported” on the
end of the support shaft (independent claim 12) or “removably
coupled” to the first shaft (independent claim 15) because the
specification does not expressly state that the anchor can be
removed. We must point out, however, that drawings alone may
be sufficient to satisfy the description requirement of § 112.
See, e.g., Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1564, 19
USPQ2d 1111, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Moreover, adequate
descriptive support is provided for a recited function if the
disclosed device inherently performs that function, even if
the specification makes no mention of the function being
performed. See In re Reynolds, 443 F.2d 384, 389, 170 USPQ
94, 98 (CCPA 1971). Here, the specification in the sentence
bridging pages 7 and 8 states that the outer shaft 11 is
provided with threaded ends 16 and 17, and Fig. 2 of the
drawings clearly depicts the threads 16 extending completely
to the right-hand end of the outer shaft 11. Accordingly, the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007