Appeal No. 96-0396
Application 08/091,953
changes made in the substitute specification filed July 12, 1994
appellants have changed the meaning of the DC to DC converter.
More specifically, the examiner asserts (Answer, page 3) that the
now claimed feature of the DC to DC converters raising a low
power supply current to a higher current has not been disclosed
in the original specification.
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Yoshizaki in view of Hamilton.
Claims 3 through 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshizaki and Hamilton and
further in view of Dice.
OPINION
Looking first to the rejection of claims 5 through 16
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, we understand this
rejection to be based upon the written description requirement of
the first paragraph of § 112. In general, the test for determin-
ing compliance with the written description requirement of § 112
is whether the disclosure of the application as originally filed
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007