Appeal No. 2003-0365
Application No. 09/280,601
sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 116, 117, 124-132, 134
and 135 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Apparently because we did not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 116, 117, 124-132, 134 and 135 under § 112,
first paragraph, appellants believe that "the Decision should
have concluded that the Examiner's rejections had been Affirmed-
In-Part and Reversed-In-Part" (page 1 of Request, second
paragraph). However, it is a long-standing practice of the Board
to designate a decision as an affirmance when a rejection or
rejections of all the claims on appeal are sustained,
notwithstanding that another rejection by the examiner may have
been reversed. This is so because it is the decision of the
examiner to reject all the appealed claims that is either
affirmed, reversed or affirmed-in-part.
Appellants request clarification because they "have the
opportunity to file a continuation of the subject application and
obtain allowance with respect to claims 116-133" (page 2 of
Request, second paragraph). However, there is nothing about our
designation of the decision as an affirmance which precludes
appellants from filing a continuation application and pursuing
the allowance of claims 116-133.
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007