Appeal No. 96-4043
Application 08/235,538
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal is from the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 12 through 14. Claims 15 through 23, the only other2
claims pending in the application, stand allowed.
The invention relates to “containers for light-sensitive
strip or sheet materials” (specification, page 1). Claim 12 is
illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and reads as
follows:
12. A container for enclosing a strip or sheet of light
sensitive material of the type including an elongated opening
from said container for withdrawing said light-sensitive
material, said opening having a pair of opposed inner faces; and
a strip of light-locking material attached to each of said inner
faces, characterized by: said light-locking material being a
woven, napped and sheared fabric having staple yarn weft floats
with said staple yarn fibers raised therefrom to form a pile to
prevent light from entering said container and exposing said
light-sensitive material.
2The record in this application indicates (1) that none of
claims 12 through 14 has been twice rejected and (2) that the
decision of the examiner appealed from (Paper No. 8) was not
expressly designated as a final rejection or action. These
circumstances raise the issue of whether the instant appeal is
premature (see 35 U.S.C. § 134 and 37 CFR § 1.191(a)). It is
apparent from the Notice of Appeal (Paper No. 9) and main brief
(Paper No. 10) that the appellant considers the decision appealed
from to be a final rejection or action. It would also appear
from the statement in the answer (Paper No. 11) that “[n]o
amendment after final has been filed” (page 1) that the examiner
also considers the decision appealed from to be a final rejection
or action. In this light, we regard the decision appealed from
to be a final rejection or action, with the examiner’s failure to
expressly designate it as such being the result of an inadvertent
oversight.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007