Appeal No. 96-2192
Application 08/306,856
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the
examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and the Answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
Turning first to the rejection of claims 2 through 4
under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112, we reverse this
rejection. Although the rejection of these claims was
included in the third page of the Final Rejection, Paper No.
15, dated April 28, 1995 for the version of claims 2 through 4
pending at that time, an Amendment accompanying the Reply
Brief dated October 19, 1995 amended these claims to remove
the questioned antecedent basis language of a "surgical
instrument." This Amendment bears an approved for entry
indication by the examiner in the uppermost left portion of
the Amendment on file. The subsequent communication from the
examiner dated November 29, 1995, notes and permits entry of
the Reply Brief but is silent with respect to its accompanying
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007