Appeal No. 95-2179
Application No. 07/994,536
We express our concern and dismay that an examiner in the
United States Patent and Trademark Office would forward to
appeal a case in this state of disrepair. The single
rejection presented on appeal is clearly erroneous. A number
of substantive issues have not been addressed. We point out
that the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences is an
appellate tribunal, not charged with the responsibility of
examining patent applications de novo. On these facts, we can
only reverse the single rejection presented and return this
case to the Examining Corps with a recommendation that the
application be thoroughly
and properly examined, taking into account the "other issues"
outlined in this opinion.
The examiner's decision is reversed.
REVERSED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
WILLIAM F. SMITH ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007