The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte CRAIG M. CARPENTER, ALLEN P. MARDIAN,
PHILIP H. CAMPBELL and ROSS S. DANDO
______________
Appeal No. 2006-0419
Application 09/798,672
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before WARREN, KRATZ and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
We remand the application to the examiner for consideration and explanation of issues
raised by the record. 37 CFR § 41.50(a)(1) (2005); Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
(MPEP) § 1211 (8th ed., Rev. 3, August 2005).
The record shows that in the final action mailed September 7, 2004 (pages 15-17), the
examiner rejected appealed claim 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ramsey et al. (Ramsey), Treddenick and Attar, as applied to claims 5, 19 and 22, further in view
of O’Connor, and over Ramsey, Treddenick and Attar, as applied to claims 5, 19 and 22, further
in view of Guerra (pages 15-16). The examiner maintains these grounds of rejection in the
answer mailed May 11, 2005 (pages 16-17).1
1 Guerra does not appear in the listing of references in the answer (pages 2-3).
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007