Appeal No. 1999-1037
Application 08/804,284
Claims 11, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph, as being based on a disclosure that fails to
comply with the written description requirement found in that
paragraph of the statute.
The test for determining compliance with the written
description requirement found in the first paragraph of 35
U.S.C. § 112 is whether the disclosure of the application as
originally filed reasonably conveys to the artisan that the
inventor had possession at that time of the later claimed
subject matter, rather that the presence or absence of literal
support in the specification for the claim language. In re
Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir.
1983). The content of the drawings may also be considered in
determining compliance with the written description
requirement. Id.
In the present application, the originally filed
disclosure does not provide support for a crash cushioning
-10-
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007