Appeal No. 1998-1855 16
Application No. 08/459,537
Brierley ‘486, we find that the candidate ores, “should have at least 0.2% sulfide
present.” Accordingly, we conclude that the definition of the term “sulfide values”
constitutes an ore having a low sulfur content generally of at least about 0.2 to 0.3% by
weight as required by the claimed subject matter.
Based upon our interpretation of the term, “sulfide values,” supra, we conclude
that the claimed subject matter substantially overlaps the claims of Brierley ‘486 and
would continue protection beyond the expiration date of the Brierley ‘486 patent.
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of the examiner.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1 through 17 and 27 through 52 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was not described in the
specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that
the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed
invention is reversed.
The rejection of claims 1 through 17 and 32 through 45 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first and second paragraphs, as the claimed invention is not described in such full,
clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use
the same, and/or for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject
matter which appellants regard as the invention is reversed.
The rejection of claims 37, 44, and 51 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007