Appeal No. 95-4004
Application 07/858,171
We bring to the examiner’s attention Woodle et al. (Woodle),
U.S. 5,013,556, which issued May 7, 1991, from Application
07/425,224, filed October 20, 1989, and Martin et al. (Martin),
U.S. 5,213,804, which issued May 25, 1993, from Application
07/642,321, filed January 15, 1991. The inventors of both
patents are Martin C. Woodle, Francis J. Martin, Annie Yau-Young,
and Carl T. Redemann. Copies of both patents are being mailed
with this decision.
We remand this application to the examiner for consideration
of the patentability of the subject matter claimed in this
application in light of the subject matter disclosed and/or
claimed in Woodle and Martin. The examiner should consider and
determine the following:
(1) Whether applicants’ claim for priority under 35 U.S.C.
§ 120 in this application is incorrect. This application and
Application 07/642,231, filed January 16, 1991, do not have the
same inventive entity, do not appear to be commonly assigned, and
do not appear to be directed to either common or even similar
inventions.
(2) Whether the full scope of the subject matter of the
claims on appeal is entitled to the benefit of any one or both of
the filing dates of Application 07/642,321, filed January 15,
1991, and Application 07/425,224, filed October 20, 1989.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007