Appeal No. 1998-1847 Page 6
Application No. 08/540,095
The examiner's response (answer, pages 4-5) to the
appellant's argument is as follows:
Appellant argues at pages 5-7 of the brief that one
of ordinary skill in the art would understand what the
disclosed snap buttons are and how they operate, per se.
The examiner agrees, however, how such snap buttons
operate in connection with the instant invention would
not be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
The disclosed snap buttons are known as cooperating with
axially aligned openings formed in a pair of telescopic,
tubular members, as illustrated in appellant's Fig. 1
relating to snap buttons 20, for example. No such
telescopic, tubular members with cooperating, axially
aligned openings have been disclosed relating to legs
94,96 and seat 60 in the instant disclosure. It is
further noted appellant has not offered any reasoning as
to how the snap buttons 110 are effective in performing
the intended function.
The test for enablement is whether one skilled in the art
could make and use the claimed invention from the disclosure
coupled with information known in the art without undue
experimentation. See United States v. Telectronics, Inc., 857
F.2d 778, 785, 8 USPQ2d 1217, 1223 (Fed. Cir. 1988), cert.
denied, 109 S.Ct. 1954 (1989); In re Stephens, 529 F.2d 1343,
1345, 188 USPQ 659, 661 (CCPA 1976).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007