Appeal No. 95-0865
Application 08/08/007,950
Claim 22 has been rejected pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b) as
being indefinite within the meaning of the second paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112.
D. Further observation
We have expressly indicated why Claims 10 and 18 have not
been rejected. If applicants are aware of any prior art which
would overcome our stated reasons for not rejecting either Claim
10 or Claim 18, applicants (or their attorneys) should make the
examiner aware of that prior art. 37 CFR § 1.56. Apart from any
obligation of applicants to inform the examiner of any prior art
mentioned in the preceding sentence, should the examiner be aware
of any such prior art, the examiner should feel free to make a
rejection of Claims 10 and/or 18. In short, nothing in this
opinion should be treated as precluding the examiner from making
a rejection of Claims 10 and/or 18 (or any other claim) based on
additional prior art not mentioned in this opinion.
E. Time for taking action
This opinion contains a new ground of rejection pursuant
to Rule 196(b) (37 CFR § 1.196(b), amended effective Dec. 1,
1997). See Notice of Final Rule, 62 Fed. Reg. 53131, 53197
- 43 -
Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007