REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Agrawal et al GRIMES 112(1) KEOWN & ZUCCHERO, LLP

Enablement is a legal determination of whether a patent enables one skilled in
the art to make and use the claimed invention, is not precluded even if some
experimentation is necessary, although the amount of experimentation needed must
not be unduly extensive, and is determined as of the filing date of the patent
application. . . . . Furthermore, a patent need not teach, and preferably omits,
what is well known in the art.

Hybritech, Inc. v. Monoclonal Antibodies, Inc. , 802 F.2d 1367, 1384, 231 USPQ 81 (Fed. Cir. 1986). . . . . 716.03(b) , 2138.04, 2145, 2163, 2164.01, 2164.05(a) , 2173.05(a) , 2182, 2184

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Kanno et al PAK 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Aiken et al SIU 102(b)/103(a)/112(1) IBM CORPORATION

Under the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112, the disclosure of the application relied upon must reasonably convey to the artisan that, as of the filing date of the application, the inventor had possession of the later claimed subject matter. Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “One shows that one is ‘in possession’ of the invention by describing the invention, with all its claimed limitations, not that which makes it obvious.” Lockwood v. American Airlines, Inc. , 107 F.3d 1565, 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Although “the meaning of terms, phrases, or diagrams in a disclosure is to be explained or interpreted from the vantage point of one skilled in the art, all the limitations must appear in the specification.” Id. The specification need not describe the claimed subject matter in exactly the same terms as used in the claims, but it must contain an equivalent description of the claimed subject matter. Id.

Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 19 USPQ2d 1111 (Fed. Cir. 1991). . .1504.20, 2161, 2163, 2163.02, 2164, 2181

Lockwood v. American Airlines, Inc. , 107 F.3d 1505, 41 USPQ2d 1961 (Fed. Cir. 1997) . . . . . . . 2133.03(a) , 2163, 2163.02

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Kishen et al CRAWFORD 102(e)/103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP

Ex Parte Moyes McCARTHY 103(a)/102(b) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) JOSEPH W. BERENATO, III

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Edwards et al SIU 102(b)/103(a) O’BANION & RITCHEY LLP/ SONY ELECTRONICS, INC.

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Arning CRAWFORD 102(e) LAW OFFICE OF JIM BOICE