Appeal No. 2005-1076
Application No. 10/047,941
again emphasize that it is not for the Board to read appellants'
specification to find evidence in support of their conclusory
statement. Manifestly, it is appellants' burden to point to
specific disclosures in the specification which enable one of
ordinary skill in the art to formulate a polymer having L
moieties within the scope of the appealed claims.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (effective Sep. 13, 2004; 69 Fed. Reg. 49960
(Aug. 12, 2004); 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (Sep. 7, 2004)).
AFFIRMED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
PETER F. KRATZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007