Appeal No. 2000-0330 Page 11 Application No. 08/684,871 III. New Ground of Rejection Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.196(b)(2001), we enter a new ground of rejection against claims 18-37. "’Although [the applicant] does not have to describe exactly the subject matter claimed, . . . the description must clearly allow persons of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that [he or she] invented what is claimed.’" Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563, 19 USPQ2d 1111, 1116 (Fed. Cir. 1991)(quoting In re Gosteli, 872 F.2d 1008, 1012, 10 USPQ2d 1614, 1618 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). "[T]he test for sufficiency of support . . . is whether the disclosure of the application relied upon 'reasonably conveys to the artisan that the inventor had possession at that time of the later claimed subject matter.'" Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc., 772 F.2d 1570, 1575, 227 USPQ 177, 179 (Fed. Cir. 1985)(quoting In re Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). “Application sufficiency under §112, first paragraph, must be judged as of the filing date [of the application].” Vas- Cath, 935 F.2d at 1566, 19 USPQ2d at 1119 (citing United StatesPage: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007