Appeal No. 1999-2027
Application No. 08/452,500
invention is, for purposes of the "written
description" inquiry, whatever is now claimed.
The written description requirement generally comes into play
after an amendment to the claims. However, the examiner has
not pointed to any claim limitation that was added by
amendment and considered to be new matter. Consequently, we
find no basis for the examiner’s assertion of an inadequate
written description.
As to the enablement part of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, the examiner has not pointed to any element in the
claim which the disclosure fails to adequately teach how to
make and/or use. We find that, though numerous, the
grammatical and spelling errors in the specification do not
rise to the level of failing to provide an enabling
disclosure. As pointed out by appellants (Brief, page 5),
Figure 1A shows generally, the claimed extracting circuit,
calculating unit, and matching unit, and Figure 1B shows the
steps of extracting outermost points, extracting the line
segments, and matching with the dictionary.
More specifically, Figure 2 shows the calculation of
comparison values for creating the list of outermost points.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007