Appeal No. 95-4411
Application No. 08/125,504
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the2
final rejection of claims 1 through 12.
Claim 8 is representative and is reproduced below:
8. A process for preparing a potato chip, the process
comprising:
preparing a slice of fresh, undehydrated potato, the
slice having a thickness of from about 1 to about 3
millimeters, the slice having no added fat and no added
globular protein; and then
heating the slice in a microwave oven at a high intensity
for a period of time sufficient to produce a product having
2This is appellant’s third appeal to the Board involving
subject matter relating to a process for preparing potato
chips. In the Board’s decision in the most recent appeal
(Appeal No.
92-0573 entered February 25, 1992 in parent application
07/380,739, filed July 17, 1989), the Board expressed concern
that appellant had not shown that microwave heating of potato
slices absent any coating would result in a chip having a
surface texture, shine and air pockets as associated with deep
fat fried chips. See page 5 of the Board’s decision.
Although no rejection of any claim under the first paragraph
of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, enablement requirement was before that Board, and
although no “enablement” rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph, has been imposed against the presently
appealed claims, appellant has provided evidence in this
record which bears on this issue. Consistent with the
decision of In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143,
147 (CCPA 1976), in deciding the issues raised in this appeal,
we have reevaluated all of the evidence before us that affects
the issues and arguments presented.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007