Appeal No. 1997-1873
Application 08/300,855
described the claimed invention so that the artisan would have been able to practice
it without undue experimention. In particular, we find that the specification clearly points out that the
determination of the steady state condition of the engine is the first step in many different types of well-
known diagnostic processes of the engine.
Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 6 through 8 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph.
We have not sustained the rejection of claims 1 through 8 under 35 U .S.C. § 103, nor have
we sustained the rejection of claims 6 through 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Accordingly, the Examiner decision is reversed.
REVERSED
MICHAEL R. FLEMING )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
STUART N. HECKER )
Administrative Patent Judge )
MRF/dal
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007