Appeal No. 98-0605
Application 08/383,191
Turning to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims
4, 6 and 14 as being unpatentable over Whitman in view of
Ohlsson and claims 11 and 12 as being unpatentable over
Whitman in view of Pigg, we have carefully reviewed the
teachings of Ohlsson and Pigg but find nothing therein which
would overcome the above-noted deficiencies in the examiner's
position in regard to the teachings of Whitman. This being
the case, we will not sustain the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §
103 of claims 4, 6 and 14 based on the combined teachings of
Whitman and Ohlsson and of claims 11 and 12 based on the
combined teachings of Whitman and Pigg.
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b) we make the3
following new rejections.
Claims 1-20 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph, as being based upon an original disclosure
which fails to provide descriptive support for the subject
matter now being claimed. We initially observe that the
description requirement found in the first paragraph of 35
U.S.C. § 1l2 is separate from the enablement requirement of
Revised as of December 1, 1997.3
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007