Appeal No. 2006-1776
Application No. 10/075,976
CONCLUSION
To summarize,
• The rejection of claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 23 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable as obvious over Jennel in view of Hinton, is not sustained.
• New grounds of rejection of independent claims 1and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable as obvious over Lively in view of Acker are made under
37 CFR § 41.50(b)
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 41.50(b)
(effective September 13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (August 12, 2004), 1286 Off. Gaz.
Pat. Office 21 (September 7, 2004)). 37 CFR § 41.50(b) provides “[a] new ground of
rejection pursuant to this paragraph shall not be considered final for judicial review.”
37 CFR § 41.50 (b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN TWO MONTHS
FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options
with respect to the new ground of rejection to avoid termination of the appeal as to the
rejected claims:
(1) Reopen prosecution. Submit an appropriate amendment of the
claims so rejected or new evidence relating to the claims so rejected, or
both, and have the matter reconsidered by the examiner, in which event
the proceeding will be remanded to the examiner . . . .
(2) Request rehearing. Request that the proceeding be reheard under
§ 41.52 by the Board upon the same record . . . .
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may
be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007