Appeal No. 1995-3522
Application No. 07/912,973
The examiner attacks the sufficiency of appellants’
specification urging, for example, that the specification does
not adequately describe “how the predetermined information is
used in the on-line yield determination technique to obtain a
predicted yield” (answer, page 4); and the claims do not
specify the type of information selected with regard to the
claim 13 limitation of a “first means for providing a first
set of predetermined information...” (answer, page 4).
Moreover, the examiner challenges the adequacy of the
disclosure asserting that the specification does not explain
how to use the mathematical equations disclosed therein for
obtaining a yield determination (answer, page 5). According
to the examiner, the disclosure leaves many unanswered
questions regarding the claimed apparatus. Appellants
argue that an enabling disclosure of the claimed system for
providing a blood component product within the meaning of 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, has been furnished (brief,
pages 13-32), that the examiner appears to be requiring that
the “claims themselves must be enabling” (reply brief, page 2)
and that the examiner’s reasoning and conclusions regarding
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007