Appeal No. 96-3174
Application 07/970,608
This is a decision in an appeal from the examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1-20, all the claims in the application.2
Appellant’s invention pertains to a method (claims 1-17)
and an apparatus (claims 18-20) for forming an article from a
molten plasticized resin using an injection molding machine.
Independent method claims 1 and 10 are representative of the
2The present application, filed pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.62,
purports to be a continuation-in-part application of parent
application S.N. 07/749,937. As stated in the Manual of
Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 201.06(b) (6th ed., Rev.
2, July 1996, page 200-22), “[t]he original disclosure of an
application filed under 37 CFR 1.62 will be the original
parent application, amendments entered in the parent
application, and amendments filed on the filing date and
referred to in the oath or declaration by the inventor(s).”
In the present instance, a 37 CFR § 1.116 amendment originally
submitted on September 4, 1992 (Paper No. 6) in the parent
application, has been entered in the present application as a
preliminary amendment (Paper No. 11). However, this amendment
was not entered in the parent application and was not referred
to in the declaration filed on the filing date of the present
application. In light of these circumstances, appellant
should take whatever steps he deems appropriate in order to
avoid possible questions of lack of descriptive support in the
original disclosure (i.e., “new matter”) for the changes to
the claims effected by the previously unentered 37 CFR § 1.116
amendment originally submitted in the parent application, and
now entered in the present application as a preliminary
amendment.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007