Appeal No. 1998-2065
Application 08/713,788
13 as “new matter” lacking support in the original disclosure
indicates that the rejection is predicated on an alleged
failure of the specification to comply with the written
description requirement. Although the appellants’ original
disclosure does not expressly mention a “loop extension,” it
does provide the requisite support for this limitation in the
original detailed description of Figure 9 on specification
page 9. While this description is somewhat garbled, it is
readily apparent that the segment of non-elastic (plastic)
portion 74 on the right side of Figure 9 constitutes an
“extension” which is associated with the “loop” formed by
elastic portion 72 and non-elastic portion 74 on the left side
of Figure 9, i.e., a loop extension. Thus, here again the
disclosure of the application as originally filed would
reasonably convey to the artisan that the appellants had
possession at that time of a garbage bag comprising a “loop
extension” as recited in claim 13.
Therefore, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, rejection of claim 13 or of claims 14
through 16 which depend therefrom.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007