Appeal 95-4477
Application 08/006,350
was held to be directed to a different invention than the
original range.
The same is true in the case before us. But for the
newly added A:B range, applicant would not have been able to
distinguish in any patentable sense (anticipation and/or
obviousness) the claimed invention from that described by
Schaefer. Hence, applicant would have us believe that there13
is a patentable difference between the Schaefer range of 10:1
to 1:1 and his range of "about >10:1 to 15:1." Thus,
applicant apparently believes that he described two separate
inventions, possibly three separate inventions, in the
specification, as filed, viz., (1) all A:B ratios which
otherwise fall within the scope of claim 1, (2) an A:B ratio
of about 4:1 to about 19:1 and (3) about >10:1 to about 19:1.
For the reasons given, we find that this case is more
like Baird than it is like Wertheim. We also note that the
"about >10:1 to 15:1" limitation appears in all the claims on
appeal. Accordingly, we enter a new rejection of claims 1-14,
21 and 23-25, all the claims on appeal, pursuant 37 CFR
The Schaefer range of 10:1 to 1:1 describes a range which overlaps with the13
range of "about >10:1 to 15:1." The language >10:1 does not overlap with 10:1.
However, addition of the language "about" broadens >10:1 which necessarily means "about
>10:1 reads on 10:1."
- 14 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007