Invocation of Star Trek does not impress BPAI
From Ex parte Sarraf :
In particular, we do not understand how Appellants’ analogy in the Brief to a “recent Star Trek movie” and “transwarp beaming” provides evidence to show that the Examiner has erred regarding the rejection under § 112, second paragraph. (See App. Br. 8-9). Therefore, because the Specification is silent as to how to treat the video signal as noise to thereby recover additional information previously added thereto, we conclude that the claim is neither enabled nor definite.
In particular, we do not understand how Appellants’ analogy in the Brief to a “recent Star Trek movie” and “transwarp beaming” provides evidence to show that the Examiner has erred regarding the rejection under § 112, second paragraph. (See App. Br. 8-9). Therefore, because the Specification is silent as to how to treat the video signal as noise to thereby recover additional information previously added thereto, we conclude that the claim is neither enabled nor definite.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home