Appeal No. 1998-0097
Application No. 08/513,036
Claim 5 stands rejected under the 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being
unpatentable over Heyen.
Finally, all of the appealed claims also stand rejected
under the 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Van NT
Blik in view of Menigaux and Heyen.
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer
for a complete exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed
by the Appellants and by the Examiner concerning the above
noted rejections.
OPINION
We will not sustain any of the rejections advanced by the
Examiner in this appeal.
THE SECTION 112 REJECTION
It is the Examiner's basic position that the lower limit
of 0.25 for the flow ratio range defined by each of the
appealed claims is not supported by the written description of
the Appellants' original disclosure as required by the first
paragraph of § 112.
The test for determining compliance with the written
description requirement is whether the disclosure of the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007