Appeal No. 95-4966
Application No. 08/072,182
A. The Rejection under § 112, First Paragraph
Appellant does not contest the examiner’s final rejection
of claims 17 and 20 under the first paragraph of § 112 (Brief,
page 7). Therefore we summarily affirm the examiner’s
rejection. We note that the claimed coating thickness of “50-
2500 Angstroms” is not equivalent to the original disclosure
of a coating thickness of “0.05 to 0.25 micrometers” (see the
specification, page 14, lines 19-20).2
We further note that appellant has “rewritten” claim 17
in the Appendix to the Brief with --0.05 to 0.25 micrometers--
substituted for “50-2500 Angstroms” (Brief, page 7). The
examiner states that this “proposed” amendment would overcome
the rejection under the first paragraph of § 112 but this
amendment has not been properly submitted and has not been
entered (Answer, page 7). Any “proposed” amendment to
appealed claim 17 is not before us. Our affirmance of this
rejection is based on claim 17 as presented in the Amendment
2The range “0.05 to 0.25 micrometers” is equivalent to
“500 to 2500 Angstroms” since 1 Angstrom is equal to 10-10
meters. See Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary, 3rd ed., p. 57, The
Blakiston Co., Inc. (1953).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007