Appeal No. 1998-2107
Application No. 08/137,624
45, 47-58 and 59 were rejected.” The examiner confirms that “appellant’s [sic]
statement of the status of amendments after final rejection contained in the brief is
correct.”
However, upon review of the Answer3 we find no statement of a rejection that
refers to claims 38-45, 47-57 and 59. Therefore the rejection of claims 38-45, 47-
57 and 59 has been withdrawn, as a matter of standard procedure. Paperless
Accounting, Inc. v. Bay Area Rapid Transit Sys., 804 F.2d 659, 663, 231 USPQ
649, 651-652 (Fed. Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 933 (1987). Accordingly,
while we find no statement on this record by the examiner acknowledging this issue,
claims 38-45, 47-57 and 59 are free from rejection. In addition, the “INDEX OF
CLAIMS” inside the front flap of the File Wrapper fails to reflect that claims 38-45,
47-57 and 59 are free from rejection. Instead, the last entry made in this index was
on October 1995, presumably corresponding to the Non-Final Rejection (Paper No.
8) mailed November 6, 1995. As a result, this index fails to correctly identify the
status of any claim on appeal.
We further note the examiner’s statement (Answer, § 8, page 3) that “[t]he
copy of the appealed claims contained in the Appendix to the brief is correct.”
However, upon review of these claims we note that appealed claim 49 is incorrectly
recited, and appealed claim 50 is not recited in appellants’ Appendix of claims. As
a result, claim 51, as recited in appellants’ appendix of claims, is improperly
dependent on claim 49.
3 Paper No. 19, mailed June 21, 1997.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007