Interference No. 103,534
contained therein, (ii) of the focusing lens assembly that relate to the radii of curvature,
thickness, index of refraction and spacing of each of the six different lenses contained therein,
and (iii) of the spacing between the corrector lens assembly and the focusing lens assembly.
The junior party asserts that the drawings of senior party’s application, in particular Figure 5,
cannot be relied on to derive lens prescriptions, which are on the order of fractions of a
millimeter, and thus establish enablement because 1) the senior party failed to disclose the
scale of the drawings, 2) the senior party failed to disclose how any of the drawings were
generated, and 3) the senior party‘s description of the drawing of Figure 5 states that it is an
exploded schematic view, on an enlarged scale.
With respect to the issue of Owen’s written description, Phillips contends that
Owen’s application fails to describe a collimator assembly having a focusing lens assembly
which includes lens structures that allow the focusing lens assembly to re-image a source image
at an infinite conjugate as set forth in the count. It is asserted that there are no lens prescriptions
relating to radii of curvature, thickness or spacing in the Owen specification and that Owen’s own
witnesses testified that the prescriptions are important.
It is urged that Owen’s application fails to describe at least one optical element in
the corrector lens assembly of the collimator assembly which is afocal to wavelengths in the mid-
region of a given spectral range and refracts wavelengths outside the mid-region.
Phillips also contends that the Owen application fails to describe a collimator
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007