Appeal No. 98-0605
Application 08/383,191
"substantially" in recitation (1), the appellant implies the
permissible inclusion of some conduits in the roof system.
Similarly, with respect to recitation (2), the appellant
implies the permissible exclusion of some of the air being
forced directly into the roof system. Clearly, there is no
descriptive support in the original disclosure for the
inclusion of some conduits in the roof system and the
exclusion of some of the air being forced directly into the
roof system. According to the original disclosure, there are
no conduits in the roof system and all of the air is forced
directly into the roof system.
With respect to independent claim 1, there is
additionally no descriptive support for the recitation of "the
blower having a seal" (line 10) or "the exhaust port seal"
(line 22). According to the original disclosure, the blower
14 and housing 12 are separate, distinct elements (see
specification, page 1; Figs. 1 and 2) and the "seal" is
effected by "flashing 84 which is bonded to the lower edges of
the housing 12 and extends beneath the covering 36 adjacent
the housing . . ." (specification, page 12, lines 4-6). Thus,
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007