Appeal 2007-0062
Application 10/706,797
1 apparatus. Thus the specification and the drawings do not
2 support the claimed steps of “… moving the fingers assemblies
3 up, over, and down over the top edges of the bag” in delivering
4 the bag to a sealing apparatus as claimed in claim 48.
5 (Emphasis by the Examiner).
6
7 10. With respect to claim 58, Applicants argue that (Br. 16):
8 [T]he text clearly supports three axis of movement for the
9 gripper assembly …. The movement of the gripper assembly 50
10 results in the finger assemblies 64, 67 moving inwardly
11 (laterally towards the hopper 28) and downwardly such that the
12 fingers 64, 67 extend into the bag 46.
13
14 11. The Examiner responded and found that (Answer 6):
15 With respect to claim 58, the specification does not disclose or
16 support “a pair of finger assemblies that move inwardly and
17 down to grasp the top edges of the bag” recited in claim 58
18 because the specification at page 11, lines 14-31, teaches that
19 the fingers assemblies are fixedly mounted to the gripper
20 assembly 50 and that only the inner fingers 67 move outwardly
21 from each other to meet the respective outer fingers 62 to
22 clampingly engage a bag 46.
23
24 D. Principles of Law
25 Adequate written description means that, in the specification, the
26 applicant must “convey with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art
27 that, as of the filing date sought, he or she was in possession of the [claimed]
28 invention.” Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563, 19 USPQ2d
29 1111, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
30 “A person shall be entitled to a patent unless …..the invention was
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013