Appeal No. 1998-2904
Application 08/715,256
Representative claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. An image pick-up apparatus, comprising an image sensor with a plurality of gate
electrodes arranged over a semiconductor body and, in dependence on voltages applied to
the gate electrodes, defining lateral dimensions of regions in the semiconductor body which
constitute respective light-sensitive elements, each light-sensitive element being underneath
one or more adjoining gate electrodes and having an active surface area, which light-sensitive
element converts radiation incident on its active surface area into collected charge carriers,
and a control circuit which is configured to adjust the size of the active surface areas of the
light-sensitive elements by adjustment of electric voltages to be applied to the gate electrodes.
There are no references relied upon by the examiner.
Claims 1 through 18 stand rejected under the enablement and best mode provisions of
the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the examiner, reference is made
to the brief and reply brief, as well as the answer, for the respective positions of the appellants
and the examiner.
OPINION
We reverse both rejections of all claims on appeal.
As to the enablement issue, the specification of the application must teach those
skilled in the art how to make and use the claimed invention without undue experimentation.
Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, 1365, 42 USPQ2d 1001, 1004 (Fed.
Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 397 (1997). Enablement is also not precluded even if some
experimentation is necessary, although the amount of experimentation needed must not be
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007