Appeal No. 96-2366
Application 08/076,824
Upon return of the application, the examiner and appellant(s) should determine who
is or are the correct inventors of the subject matter now claimed in this application. Once
that determination has been made, the examiner should see to it that the appropriate
records in the Patent and Trademark Office accurately reflect that determination.
2. The “continuing data” set forth on the face of the administrative file, which again, was
supplied to counsel in the form of the official filing receipt, does not match the information
contained on page 1 of the application. For example, the information on the face of the
administrative file indicates that Application 06/810,478 filed December 18, 1985, is a
continuation-in-part of an application filed in 1986, which, of course, cannot be.
Upon return of the application, the examiner and appellant(s) should review the
various parent applications and determine the correct chronology and relationship
between the various applications. Once that determination has been made, the examiner
should see to it that the appropriate records in the Patent and Trademark Office are
corrected.
3. In filing this application under 37 CFR § 1.62, counsel checked the box on the form
which indicated the intent to file a continuation-in-part application. However, in the
instructions to amend the specification to insert “continuing data,” counsel checked the box
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007