Appeal No. 2001-2188
Application No. 09/085,300
the symbology used in the U.S. and German applications. An
amendment to correct an obvious error does not constitute new
matter where one skilled in the art would not only recognize the
existence of error in the specification, but also the appropriate
correction. In re Oda, 443 F.2d 1200, 1203, 170 USPQ 268, 270-71
(CCPA 1971). In our view, whatever the mathematical symbol used,
the relationship between the gas intake diameter and the pump
current is clear when considering the entirety of Appellant’s
disclosure. From the detailed disclosure at pages 5 and 6 of
Appellant’s specification, the described ratio relationship
establishes that the measured value of pump current IM at a
predetermined gas intake orifice diameter DP is related in the
same way that an optimum or target pump current IOPT is related to
an optimum gas intake orifice diameter DOPT.
We further agree with Appellant that, contrary to the
Examiner’s contention, the term “optimum pump current” is
described with sufficient particularity in the specification so
as to satisfy the written description requirement of the statute.
It is apparent from our reading of the specification that the
“optimum pump current” is a target value that is determined
dependent on various factors including, for example, the desired
exhaust gas ratio for a particular application. It is also clear
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007