Appeal No. 98-0455
Application 08/467,247
[e]nablement is the criterion, and every
detail need not be set forth in the written
specification if the skill in the art is
such that the disclosure enables one to
make the invention.
For the above reasons, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 3, 4, 7 and 8 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as being directed to a non-enabling
disclosure.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
NEAL E. ABRAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF
PATENT
CHARLES E. FRANKFORT ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge )
INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007