Appeal No. 1997-1888 Page 6
Application No. 08/221,467
appellants refer to Exhibit A (attached to the brief) "with
the obtuse angle labeled as ?" drawn in Figures 6 and 16 of
the instant application.
The test for determining compliance with the written
description requirement 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 than the presence or
absence of literal support in the specification for the claim
language. See Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555,
1563-64, 19 USPQ2d 1111, 1116-17 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re
Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir.
1983).
It is our view that the specification does not provide
written description support for the limitation that "the yarn
extends at an obtuse angle from the inner edge of the endless
belt" as recited in claim 51. Notwithstanding the appellants'
argument to the contrary, the appellants' Exhibit A does not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007