Appeal No. 1998-3301 Page 8
Application No. 08/784,361
We sustain the rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, but not the rejection of claims 8, 9,
11, 17, 18, 21, 22 and 23.
In the final rejection (pp. 3-4), the examiner rejected
claims 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22 and 23 as being indefinite
for the following two reasons. One, claim 8 was dependent on
canceled claim 1. Two, no antecedent basis for "said rented
mailboxes" in claim 15. In the answer (p. 4) the examiner
stated that (1) the amendment to claim 8 had been entered and
"the rejection is overcome," and (2) the rejection of claim 15
had not been addressed by the appellant in the brief.
We agree with the examiner that the appellant has not
specifically contested the specific objection to claim 15
raised by the examiner in this rejection. Accordingly, we
summarily sustain the rejection of claim 15. However, since
the examiner has not set forth any specific basis for the
rejection of claims 8, 9, 11, 17, 18, 21, 22 and 23, we
summarily reverse the decision of the examiner to reject
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007