Appeal No. 1999-2304
Application 08/667,242
It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the disclosure complies with the written
description and enablement requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
We are also of the view that the evidence relied upon and the
level of skill in the particular art would not have suggested
to one of ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the
invention as set forth in claims 1-10, 12-23, 25 and 26.
Accordingly, we reverse.
We consider first the rejection of claims 1-26 under
the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. These claims stand or
fall together as a single group [brief, page 6]. The examiner
has argued that the disclosure fails to satisfy both the
written description and the enablement requirements of 35
U.S.C. § 112. These are separate requirements of Section 112,
and we will consider these requirements separately.
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.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007