"Not every last detail is to be described, else patent specifications would turn into production specifications, which they were never intended to be."
How later courts described this case
- "Not every last detail is to be described, else patent specifications would turn into production specifications, which they were never intended to be."
- the Board erred in requiring inclusion of the details of the product "as it is 'being marketed.' "
- best mode requirement precludes inventors “from applying for patents while at the same time concealing from the public preferred embodiments of their inventions which they have in fact conceived”
- “Not every last detail is to be described, else patent specifications would turn into product specifications, which they were never intended to be.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WORLEY, Chief Judge
(concurring).
This appeal presents far more of a problem to me than appears to be the case with the majority.
It poses very close questions regarding the issue of “new matter,” and particularly the sufficiency of applicant’s disclosure. There is doubt in my mind that the disclosure properly satisfies the minimum statutory requirement, and it is only by resolving that doubt in appellant’s favor, that I concur in the result.