Appeal No. 95-4435
Application No. 07/833,146
Finally, appellants rely on seven publications cited and
submitted with the Information Disclosure Statement
accompanying their Appeal Brief. In the Examiner's Answer,
page 7, first full paragraph, the examiner states that these
publications have been "fully considered." Nevertheless, in
the communication mailed July 22, 1996 (Paper No. 22), the
examiner states that "[t]he references listed on the
Information Disclosure Statement filed August 5, 1994 along
with the Brief have not been considered" (emphasis added).
Again, the examiner's position is inconsistent and
procedurally flawed.
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
)
)
)
HUBERT C. LORIN )
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007