Appeal No. 1999-2057
Application 08/405,062
meeting room is "misdescriptive" (EA10), "extremely vague and
misdescriptive in defining a physical place" (EA10), and
"[t]his definition does nothing to clear the confusion as to
how the virtual meeting room is defined" (EA11), all appear
more appropriate to § 112, second paragraph, indefiniteness
rather than § 112, first paragraph, lack of enablement.
Nevertheless, since the rejection is clearly stated to be
under § 112, first paragraph, lack of enablement, we will only
address this ground of rejection.
The Examiner does not provide any reasoning why the
claimed subject matter could not be made without undue
experimentation by one of ordinary skill in the art and,
therefore, has not made even a colorable prima facie case of
nonenablement. We have no trouble understanding the
terminology of a "virtual meeting room" as referring to an
electronic circuit configuration by which user workstations
can communicate by data, audio, and video ports of a network;
that is, the electronic interconnection of user terminals
simulates a meeting room because participants can interact
with one another via multimedia (data, audio, and video).
Manifestly, there is no one physical "meeting room" location
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007