Appeal No. 2004-0910
Application No. 09/756,632
this issue as set forth supra is to determine whether the
examiner has met his burden of proof by advancing acceptable
reasoning inconsistent with enablement. This the examiner has
not done.
The examiner argues that the specification does not describe
how to perform the positioning and providing step of the
invention recited in claim 13, from which claims 14 to 16 depend.
This is not so. The step of providing at least one tactile
stimulating cue positioned laterally and situated on at least one
side of the forward portion of the trigger guard is described in
the specification at page 4 as forming a groove or a notch 22 on
the lateral side of the forward portion of the trigger guard.
The cue is also clearly depicted in Figures 2 and 3. The
description in the specification along with the depicting in
Figures 2 and 3 would clearly enable a person, without undue
experimentation, to place a notch or groove on the lateral side
of the forward position of the trigger guard. Therefore, in our
view, the disclosure clearly enables this step of the invention.
In regard to the step of positioning a cue to provide a
stimulus to a user’s trigger finger when the firearm is gripped
is discussed on page 1 of the specification:
Page 5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007