Appeal No. 96-2871
Application 08/352,964
paragraph,
35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103. Thus, we will sustain
the rejection of these claims. However, we will reverse the
35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of claim 7.
At the outset, we note that Appellants have argued the
Examiner’s objection (under 37 CFR § 1.75(d)(1)) to the
language “a non-rigid sound absorbing material” of claim 15.
We agree with the Examiner that this is a petitionable matter
under 37 CFR § 1.181, not appealable under 37 CFR § 1.191. In
addition, we note that the cited language did not appear in an
original claim. It first appeared in a proposed amendment
after final rejection (not entered) in the parent application,
received October 11, 1994, and was not entered until the
filing of this continuation
application on December 8, 1994. The cited language may
constitute new matter, but this question is not before us.
Also at the outset, we note that the Appellants indicated
on page 6 of the brief that claims 3, 4 and 9 through 14 stand
or fall together with the claims from which they depend.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007