Appeal No. 2002-2185
Application 08/976,361
original disclosure does not support the recitation that the
separation device includes a swirler (independent claims 12 and
25).
Based upon the original, unamended disclosure, it is quite
clear to us that one skilled in the art would appreciate that in
the absence of a full-length rod, a spacer opening would be
unobstructed. The amended recitations in the claims respectively
reciting “substantially unobstructed” flow area and
“substantially as large” are therefore determined to lack
descriptive support in the specification, as filed. As to the
claim recitation that the separation device includes a swirler,
we share appellants’ point of view (main brief, page 10) that the
disclosure provides support therefor, e.g., augers, vanes, and a
removable central shaft or other structural support for
separation devices (swirlers) are disclosed (specification, page
17).
For the reasons set forth above, we are not in accord with
appellants’ view (main brief, pages 7 and 8, and reply brief,
pages 1 and 2) that, from the written specification (page 3,
lines 22 through 27), those skilled in the art would recognize
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007