Appeal No. 1998-2914
Application 08/510,971
To satisfy §112, the specification disclosure must
be sufficiently complete to enable one of ordinary
skill in the art to make the invention without undue
experimentation, although the need for a minimum
amount of experimentation is not fatal * * *.
Enablement is the criterion, and every detail need
not be set forth in the written specification if the
skill in the art is such that the disclosure enables
one to make the invention. [Citations omitted;
emphasis added.]
Moreover, the determination of what constitutes undue
experimentation in a given case requires the application of
a standard of reasonableness, having regard for the nature of
the invention and the state of the art. Ex parte Forman, 230
USPQ 546, 547 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1986).
The examiner has merely made broad allegations that the
disclosure is insufficient to teach how the various control
systems and components thereof cooperate to perform the
claimed functions, but has provided no convincing reasons as
to why the appellants' disclosure is in fact insufficient.
For example, the examiner broadly contends that there is no
adequate disclosure of (1) "hard wired circuitry", (2) how the
register mark signals and the reference marks can be scanned
by the same receiver and sensed substantially at the same
time, (3) how the signals generated by the sensors are
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007