Appeal No. 94-0995
Application No. 07/662,722
patentability, in light of the arguments presented in
appellants' Reply Brief, itself constitutes reversible error.
As stated in In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685,
686 (Fed. Cir. 1986):
If a prima facie case is made in the first instance,
and if the applicant comes forward with reasonable
rebuttal, whether buttressed by experiment, prior
art references, or argument, the entire merits of
the matter are to be reweighed. [Citation omitted].
This the examiner did not do. Second, regardless of two
status inquiries, the examiner failed to issue any form of
communication to appellants between September 11, 1995, and
May 18, 1998, responding to the ORDER REMANDING TO EXAMINER
(Paper No. 19). This inordinate delay in communicating with
the applicants can hardly be said to be "customer friendly."
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007