Appeal No. 97-3561
Application No. 08/352,190
examiner observes that “Appellant has failed to point out
exactly where in the original specification provides support
for a non-optical fiber based RF signal train generator and
interferoceiver”
[page 5].
We note that the claims do not recite that the RF
generator and interferoceiver are non-optical fiber based, but
rather, recite these elements generically, that is the claims
include within their scope both optical fiber based elements
and non-optical fiber based elements. Appellant has disclosed
as the preferred embodiment an optical fiber based system.
The examiner has not questioned that this more specific
embodiment is adequately disclosed.
The examiner’s rejection is tantamount to a rejection of these
claims on undue breadth.
With respect to the examiner’s request that appellant
point to support in the disclosure for a non-optical fiber
based system, appellant points to page 15 of the specification
wherein it is stated:
As the technology evolves, instead of
optical fibers, new means may become
available to us for designing new
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007