Appeal No. 1998-2729
Application 08/220,851
489 (CCPA 1976). The purpose of the written description
requirement is to ensure that the applicants convey with
reasonable clarity, to those skilled in the art, that they
were in possession of the invention as of the filing date of
the application. For the purposes of the written description
requirement, the invention is "whatever is now claimed." Vas-
cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1564, 19 USPQ2d 1111,
1117 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
The manner in which the specification as filed meets the
written description requirement is not material. The
requirement may be met by either an express or an implicit
disclosure. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 262, 191 USPQ 90,
96 (CCPA 1976). An invention claimed need not be described in
ipsis verbis in order to satisfy the written description
requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph. In re
Lukach, 442 F.2d 967, 969, 169 USPQ 795, 796 (CCPA 1971). The
question is not whether an added word was the word used in the
specification as filed, but whether there is support in the
specification for the employment of the word in the claims,
that is, whether the concept is present in the original
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007