Appeal 97-1803
Application 08/300,902
not just a reference as a whole. Cf. Clintec Nutrition Co. v.
Baxa Corp., 44 USPQ2d 1719, 1723 n.16 (N.D. Ill. 1997) (where
a party points the court to multi-page exhibits without citing
a specific portion or page, the court will not pour over the
documents to extract the relevant information, citing United
States v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955, 956 (7th Cir. 1991) (judges do
not hunt for truffles buried in briefs)). The examiner's
answer in this appeal is at best an invitation to the board to
scour the record, research any legal theory that comes to
mind, and serve generally the function of a patent examiner.
We decline the invitation, believing it appropriate for the
examiner in the first instance to fully explain why a
rejection is proper. Cf. Ernst Haas Studio, Inc. v. Palm
Press, Inc., 164 F.3d 110, 112, 49 USPQ2d 1377, 1379 (2d Cir.
1999).
REVERSED.
______________________________
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007