Appeal No. 2004-1452
Application No. 29/138,830
curvature” has no basis in fact on this record. See In re Alton
supra (if one of ordinary skill would have understood the
inventor to be in possession of the claimed invention, even if
every nuance of the claims is not explicitly described, then the
description requirement is met). From consideration of the
design as a whole, we determine that the saddle portions of the
amended Figures would have been readily apparent to a designer of
ordinary skill in this art from the perspective view of original
Figures 1-2.
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Brief,
Reply Brief, and the Wagner Declaration, we determine that, based
on the design as a whole and the totality of the record, the
preponderance of the evidence establishes that the written
description requirement of section 112 has been met by the
amended Figures 1-8 submitted by appellant. See In re Alton, 76
F.3d at 1175, 37 USPQ2d at 1584, citing In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Accordingly,
we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection on appeal.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007