Appeal No. 2006-1587
Application No. 10/020,768
Other Issues
We note that the specification refers to a broad range for
the glass fiber content of about 10 to about 80% (Specification,
page 2) and to a preferred range for the glass fiber content of
about 25 to about 40% (Specification, page 3). In our review of
the record, however, we find no explanation of why the new
limitation of a glass fiber content of less than 50% is
considered to be descriptively supported by the specification.
In any future prosecution that may occur, Appellant and the
Examiner should address whether and how this limitation complies
with the written description requirement of the first paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
In addition, for unknown reasons, claim 12 has not been
rejected over Heidweiller in view of Helwig ‘001. In any future
prosecution that may occur, the Examiner should consider whether
such a rejection should be made.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Examiner rejecting all appealed claims
is affirmed.
-20-
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007