Appeal No. 97-2764
Application No. 08/354,018
intentional, is considered. Id." Spectra-Physics, Inc. v.
Coherent, Inc., 827 F.2d 1524, 3 USPQ2d 1737, 1745 (Fed. Cir.
1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 954. The examiner in the case
before us has presented no basis for asserting a lack of best
mode, no less evidence of concealment. Accordingly, the best
mode portion of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, has no merit.
Turning to the enablement rejection, we again find no
basis. The examiner states (Answer, page 3): "The
specification disclosure as a whole does not disclose how to
average the strength of the signals received by the receivers
such as to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the
claimed invention." However, as pointed out by the appellants
(Brief, page 7), page 10, line 11 - page 11, line 5, of the
specification clearly explains how the averaging is carried
out. Furthermore, Figure 5 shows a working source code
listing with detailed
comments, and Figures 2-4 show specific circuit diagrams of
the transmitter, the receiver, and the interface module.
Therefore, we find that the disclosure is enabling.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007