Appeal No. 97-1835
Application 08/178,068
We further note that the examiner has appended two
references to the final rejection and the examiner's answer.
The first reference appears to be a copy of page 468 of the
Proceedings of the Polyurethane 1994 Conference. The second
reference appears to be page 53 of the Standard Handbook for
Mechanical Engineers. Where a reference is relied upon to
support a rejection, whether or not in a minor capacity, there
is no excuse for not positively including the reference in a
statement of the rejection. In re Hoch, 428 F.2d 1341, 1342
n.3, 166 USPQ 406, 407 n.3 (CCPA 1970). We will comment on
the contents of these unapplied references infra.
The examiner has noted that appellant's brief in-
cludes a statement that claims 1 and 3 through 14 do not stand
or fall together and appellant provides sufficient reasons
therefore under 37 CFR § 192(c)(7). Accordingly, appellant's
claims do not stand or fall together.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal
in light of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner.
As a
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007