Appeal No. 95-4743
Application No. 08/066,773
particularly critical that the concept be defined and claimed
with a reasonable degree of precision.
We note in passing that an inkling of what appellant
intends by the word "similar" first appears on page 2,
numbered paragraph 5, of the Nae Declaration where similarity
is defined in terms of three criteria indicating that
"similar" oils are:
...a) all vegetable oils, b) have similar high
linoleic acid components and c) have similar low
palmitic acid components... (underlining added for
emphasis)
Even this definition, had it been included in appellant's
original disclosure, appears inadequate in that two of the
three criteria likewise depend on the word "similar", which
remains undefined.
With regard to nonenablement, we note that appellant's
specification is devoid of even one example of an oil residue
"similar" to a base oil for purposes of the invention other
than where a cation is derived from an oil which is the same
as the base oil to be thickened. While the lack of a single
example is not necessarily dispositive with regard to
nonenablement, in our view the practically unlimited breadth
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007