Appellant overcomes written description rejection

The appellant in Ex parte KRONENBERGER won on written description:

We agree with Appellant that the disclosure in the Specification of
exemplary objects which are made to perform at least one function that is
not related to the construction of the headwear piece is sufficient disclosure
to reasonably convey to skilled artisans that Appellant possessed the claimed
invention as of the filing date. In other words, one of ordinary skill reading
the examples provided in the original disclosure would understand that
Appellant was in possession of an invention in which the object is
specifically designed to perform a clearly identifiable function that is not
related to the construction of the headwear piece. Accordingly, we reverse
the rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, based on
lack of an adequate written description.