Appeal 2007-2070
Application 10/123,457
1 (2) The appeal is remanded to the Examiner to place evidence of the
2 notoriety of the limitations set forth in claims 21, 43, 44, 49, 50, 65, and
3 66 in the record.
4 The Examiner took official notice of the notoriety of these limitations in the
5 Non-Final Rejection mailed October 3, 2005. The Appellants traversed this in
6 their response to that action filed January 3, 2006, and have maintained this
7 traversal through the Appeal Brief. The Examiner has not yet responded to this
8 traversal by placing written evidence of the notoriety found by the Examiner in the
9 record. We therefore remand this appeal for the purpose of having the Examiner
10 put such evidence in the record.
11 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
12 The Appellants have sustained their burden of showing that the Examiner erred
13 in rejecting claims 1-20, 22-42, 45-48, and 51-64 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
14 anticipated over the prior art.
15 We do not reach conclusions as to the remaining rejection because of our
16 remand to the Examiner for further consideration and evidence.
17 DECISION
18 To summarize, our decision is as follows:
19 • The rejection of claims 1-20, 22-42, 45-48, and 51-64 under 35 U.S.C.
20 § 102(e) as anticipated by Treyz is not sustained.
21 • We remand the appeal to the Examiner to
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013