Appeal No. 1997-4395
Application No. 08/351,044
figures as originally filed, we conclude that the examiner's
rejection of the presently claimed invention under the
enablement portion of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112
must be reversed. The subject matter of the present claims on
appeal track the disclosed invention very closely. We,
therefore, find no need to consider the Declaration of Mr.
Coppersmith on its merits. Even though we have considered it
on the merits, it in turn tracks our own individual
understanding of the disclosed invention as originally filed.
The statement in the sentence bridging pages 3 and 4 of the
declaration that the "[t]he application teaches at
p. 16, lines 13-17, that when a skip occurs, if one desires to
monitor the disc for a second skip, the interrupt timer
generating the measured elapsed time signal must again be
synchronized with the reported elapsed time signal so that
additional skips can be identified by comparing the measured
and reported elapsed time signals" is a much more succinct
statement than that which is found in the noted portions of
the specifica-tion as filed.
We note, however, that this statement is consistent with
the overall disclosure of the invention and its logical
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007