Appeal No. 1996-0047
Application No. 08/047,758
description requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, the court stated in In re Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366,
1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983):
The test for determining compliance with the written
description requirement is whether the disclosure of
the application as originally filed reasonably
conveys to the artisan that the inventor had
possession at that time of the later claimed subject
matter, rather than the presence or absence of
literal support in the specification for the claimed
language. (citations omitted)
In the present case, we agree with appellants that the
application disclosure as originally filed reasonably conveys
to one of ordinary skill in the art that appellants
(inventors) had possession of the presently claimed oil
dispersant mixture. We find that the specification as
originally filed describes the claimed first and second
hydrocarbyl substituted monocarboxylic acid producing
materials which are formed by reacting particular olefins and
a monocarboxylic acid selected from the group consisting of
acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, crotonic acid and cinnamic
acid. See specification, pages 9 and 10. Accordingly, we
reverse the examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 through 33
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007