Appeal No. 95-1183
Application No. 07/991,693
Under the circumstances discussed above, it is clear to us
that the examiner has failed to carry her burden of establishing
a prima facie case of nonenablement and correspondingly that her
§ 112, first paragraph, rejection of claims 1 through 20 cannot
be sustained . 2
SUMMARY
In conclusion, it is our determination that we cannot
sustain either the § 112, first paragraph, rejection or the
§ 112, second paragraph, rejection of the appealed claims for the
reasons set forth above and generally discussed in the case of In
re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 194 USPQ 187 (CCPA 1977).
2The examiner’s comments in the “Response to argument”
section of her Answer questioning the utility of products
resulting from the here claimed process have no discernible
probative value.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007