Ex parte DATON-LOVETT - Page 5

                 Appeal No. 1999-0738                                                                                                                   
                 Application No. 08/474,195                                                                                                             

                 USPQ 561, 563-64 (CCPA 1982).  In calling into question the                                                                            
                 enablement of appellant’s disclosure, the examiner has the                                                                             
                 initial burden of advancing acceptable reasoning inconsistent                                                                          
                 with enablement.  Id.  In the present case, the examiner has                                                                           
                 failed to meet this burden.                                                                                                            
                          A person of ordinary skill in the art would have readily                                                                      
                 appreciated from appellant’s disclosure  that the bi-stable           2                                                                
                 characteristic of appellant’s device is the result of the bias                                                                         
                 of one of the layers of the composite structure being                                                                                  
                 temporarily overcome by the bias of the other layer to hold                                                                            
                 the device in one of its two stable positions, rather than the                                                                         
                 bias of one of the layers being “lost” as a result of that                                                                             
                 layer’s bias being less than the biasing force of the other                                                                            
                 layer.  Further, we are in accord with appellant that the                                                                              
                 ordinarily skilled artisan would fully understand from                                                                                 
                 appellant’s disclosure  how to wind the composite structure3                                                                                              
                 about a plurality of transverse parallel axes, for example, by                                                                         

                          2See, for example, page 10, line 17 through page 11, line                                                                     
                 22, and page 12, line 7 through page 13, line 7, of the                                                                                
                          3See, for example, page 21, lines 20 through 23, of the                                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007