Appeal No. 97-2481
Application No. 08/480,964
rotation (paragraph 20), Mr. Hanna does not address why this
would not have made it obvious to modify the APA, but rather
states that Anderson does not suggest using a rectangular bore in
a ferrite barrel to improve a mating connection within the bore,
etc. (paragraph 21). These statements are essentially arguments,
and are not persuasive because one cannot show nonobviouness by
attacking references individually. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413,
425, 208 USPQ 871, 882 (CCPA 1981).
Rejection (2) will accordingly be sustained.
Rejections Under 37 CFR § 1.196(b)
The following rejections are additionally entered pursuant
to 37 CFR § 1.196(b):
35 U.S.C. § 112, First Paragraph
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as being based on a non-enabling disclosure.
In order to meet the enablement requirement of § 112, first
paragraph, "the specification must enable one of ordinary skill
in the art to practice the claimed invention without undue
experimentation." National Recovery Technologies Inc. v.
Magnetic Separation Systems Inc. , 166 F.3d 1190, 1196, 49 USPQ2d
1671, 1676 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (original emphasis). As discussed
above, the claims in the present case require that the connector
provide a "substantial increase" in inductances over a filter
13
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007