Appeal No. 98-0964
Application 08/557,436
part" of the ‘506 design application.
After considering all of the evidence before us, it is
our conclusion that the examiner correctly denied appellant
the benefit of the earlier filing date of the ‘506 design
patent application and properly rejected claims 23 through 34
before us on appeal on the basis of the prior sale of the
invention as acknowledged by appellant to have occurred in
April 1994, more than one year prior to the November 14, 1995
filing date of the present utility application. With regard
to appellant’s argument concerning the asserted benefit of an
earlier effective filing date for the present application
under 35 U.S.C. § 120, we note that an express prerequisite in
the statute for such benefit is that the invention as now
claimed must be disclosed in the earlier application "in the
manner provided by the first
paragraph of section 112 of this title." As appellant has
noted on pages 5 and 6 of the brief (Paper No. 11), the test
for sufficiency of disclosure of support in a parent
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007