Appeal 2007-0255
Application 10/331,878
. . . drawings alone may be sufficient to provide
the "written description of the invention" required
by § 112, first paragraph.
Vas-Cath, 935 F.2d at 1563-64, 19 USPQ2d at 1117.
Appellant's Specification discloses "at least two boards of an open cell
polymeric foam, lying one over the other, each one having a thickness
between about 2 and 8 mm. Preferably, plastic sheets are inserted between
each pair of adjacent boards in order to favor their reciprocal sliding"
(Specification [0014]). Appellant's Specification further states that
[d]uring the curving step, the boards 2 slide on
each other, thus reaching different final bending
radii, and consequently their ends are not aligned
any more. In order to favor reciprocal sliding of
the various boards 2, and therefore the curving of
the panel, plastic sheets can be inserted between
each pair of adjacent boards.
(Specification [0028].)
Appellant's Figs. 1-3, which are all characterized as "evacuated
panel[s]" (Specification 4), illustrate what appears to be open space between
the boards 2. The Examiner interprets Appellant's drawings as showing the
boards "indirectly touching each other through a plastic sheet/layer"
(Answer 19). Appellant disputes this interpretation by pointing out that "the
white space is not just between the boards, but is continuous and totally
surrounds the boards" and that the plastic sheet/layer referred to in the
Examiner's interpretation would totally encase the boards, preventing them
from sliding at all, a situation clearly inconsistent with Appellant's
disclosure (Appeal Br. 6).
Taking into account the totality of Appellant's underlying disclosure,
we agree with Appellant that the white spaces between the boards must be
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013