Appeal No. 96-3704
Application 08/216,474
structure as disclosed in Hashimoto. Upon reviewing the art
cited by the Examiner, we fail to find that this art suggests
any desirability of the proposed Examiner's modification.
Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 1
through 6 and 8 through 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Due to a new ground of rejection, claims 8 through
11 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly
point out and
distinctly claim the subject matter which Appellant regards as
the invention. We note that the Appellant has failed to
respond to this new ground of rejection. 2
37 CFR § 1.193(b) as amended at 58 Fed. Reg. 54510,
Oct. 22, 1993, which was controlling at the time of
Appellant's filing the brief, states as follows:
2In a conversation on March 4, 1999 with Pamela Bennett,
Paralegal Specialist for the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences, Walter Linder, Registration No. 31,707,
informed Ms. Bennett that no response to the new ground of
rejection in the Examiner's Answer was filed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007