How should an examiner explain an enablement rejection?
When making an enablement rejection, the examiner should provide a clear explanation focusing on the factors, reasons, and evidence that lead to the conclusion of non-enablement. The MPEP 2164.04 states:
“The explanation of the rejection should focus on those factors, reasons, and evidence that lead the examiner to conclude e.g., that the specification fails to teach how to make and use the claimed invention without undue experimentation, or that the scope of any enablement provided to one skilled in the art is not commensurate with the scope of protection sought by the claims.“
The examiner should make specific findings of fact, supported by evidence, and draw conclusions based on these findings. If information is missing about essential parts or relationships, the examiner should identify what information is missing and explain why one skilled in the art could not supply it without undue experimentation.
To learn more: