Appeal No. 1998-2876
Application No. 08/592,930
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Tsumura.
Claims 1, 8, 14 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Tsumura in view of Masi.
Finally, claim 24 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Kishimoto.
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a thorough
discussion of the respective positions advocated by the
appellants and by the examiner concerning the above noted
rejections.
OPINION
We will not sustain any of these rejections.
The section 112, first paragraph, rejection plainly
cannot be sustained to the extent that it is based upon a
failure to comply with the written description requirement of
this paragraph. This is because the examiner has not even
identified the here claimed subject matter which is thought to
be offensive to the written description requirement. To the
extent that the rejection is based upon a failure to comply
with the enablement requirement, the rejection still cannot be
sustained. In this regard, we emphasize that the examiner has
failed to carry his initial burden of advancing acceptable
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007