Appeal No. 1997-3376
Application No. 08/176,187
out how the application, as originally filed, provides adequate
descriptive support for the amendment being made. In the
amendment filed September 23, 1994, appellants stated: “The
composite compositions of the present invention are believed to
possess nearly uniform bulk or homogeneous conductivity
properties...” (page 4; emphases added). Other than appellants’
“belief” and unsupported allegations, we are unable to find any
description in the original application that would reasonably
convey to one skilled in the art that appellants had possession
of the subject matter of amended claim 1. Indeed, appellants’
specification repeatedly states that the conductive polymer forms
a “discrete” phase within a continuous phase of the block
copolymer in the composite. Therefore, it is unlikely that the
composite would possess a homogeneous, let alone an isotropic,
surface conductivity, especially when only about 50 percent by
weight of the conductive polymer is present.
Because the application, as originally filed, does not
reasonably convey to one skilled in the art a composition with a
“homogeneous and isotropic” surface conductivity, claim 1 and all
other appealed claims violate the written description requirement
of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
13
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007