Appeal No. 1997-3121
Application 07/987,048
invention as of the filing date of the application. For the
purposes of the written description requirement, the invention is
"whatever is now claimed." Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d
1555, 1564,
19 USPQ2d 1111, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1991). We agree with appellants
that the artisan would have recognized possession of the
presently claimed invention within the original disclosure.
The examiner has erred in basing this rejection on a
consideration of whether the present claims exclude embodiments
which were within the scope of the original specification. The
original disclosure simply describes an ambient temperature
sensor. The artisan would not have interpreted the disclosed
ambient temperature sensor to be in thermal relationship with the
heating element because that would distort any measurements of
ambient temperature. The broad recitation of the ambient
temperature sensor being disposed in non-thermal sensing
relationship to the electric heating element would be exactly
what the artisan would have assumed from reading the original
disclosure. The examiner’s attempt to read the original
disclosure on another imagined embodiment makes no sense.
In summary, we agree with appellants that the original
disclosure supports the recitations now appearing in independent
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007