Appeal No. 96-0676
Application 07/963,165
the Glaser declaration (paper no. 16). See In re Piasecki,
745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re
Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1-3 and 6-10 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, on the ground that appellants’
specification fails to provide an adequate teaching of how to
use the claimed compound, claims 1, 6 and 9 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point
out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellants
regard as their invention, and claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Huebner, are reversed.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007