Appeal No. 97-3187
Application No. 07/999,422
as the appellants' failure to timely file a divisional
application was not considered to be error causing the patent
granted on the elected claims to be partially inoperative by
reason of claiming less than they had a right to claim.2
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the 35 U.S.C. §
251 rejection, we make reference to the final rejection and
the examiner's answer (Paper No. 26, mailed February 28, 1997)
for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejection, and to the appellants' brief for the appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the respective positions articulated
by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection under 35
U.S.C.
2As noted above, the appellants have withdrawn claims 3-
4.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007