Appeal No. 98-1693
Application D-07/343,182
appellants amended the drawings to show broken lines around
the original depiction of the icon.
The examiner contends that such amendments constitute new
matter and that there is no support in the original disclosure
for that which is now claimed, within the meaning of the
written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph.
Appellants contend that there is adequate support since
the original disclosure specified, at least inferentially, a
“touch video screen” and a touch video icon cannot exist
without a touch video screen. Therefore, contend appellants,
there is adequate support in the original disclosure for that
which is now claimed.
We agree with the examiner [answer-page 5] that the mere
mention of a “touch video” could “mean a multiplicity of
visual representations--a three dimensional computer monitor,
a display on a photocopier, a display on a dashboard of an
automobile, a display on an automatic teller machine, a narrow
display screen, a large display screen, a circular screen, a
curved screen, etc.” Thus, there is no support for an icon
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007