Appeal No. 98-1458 Page 20
Application No. 08/499,211
also be considered in determining compliance with the written
description requirement. See Vas-Cath, 935 F.2d at 1561, 19
USPQ2d at 1116.
We have reviewed the originally filed specification and
find no support therein for the limitation "said second rib
wall extending back to said nailhem plane and terminating
thereat." Specifically, the originally filed specification
fails to set forth the plane at which the second rib wall is
the nailhem plane. While the originally filed specification
does set forth (p. 6) that the underside of the rib 132 can be
filled and abut the exterior wall of a building, the claims at
issue cannot be read on this species for the reasons the Godes
does not anticipate claim 11 as discussed above.
We have also reviewed the originally filed drawings and
find no support therein for the limitation "said second rib
wall extending back to said nailhem plane and terminating
thereat." Specifically, while originally filed Figures 4 and
6 disclose the elongated rib as comprising a first rib wall
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007