Appeal No. 1999-1825
Application 08/799,258
charges” (emphasis added). The highlighted language does not
logically flow from the immediately preceding language and
thus does not make sense.
Claim 27 depends from claim 26 and recites the step of
“mixing two ingredients to produce a binary explosive
mixture.”
Claim 28 depends from claim 27 and specifies a particular
binary explosive. It is unclear how the step recited in claim
27 and further defined in claim 28 relates to the method steps
recited in parent claim 26.
In summary:
a) the decision of the examiner to reject claims 2, 5, 8,
10, 13 and 19 through 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed;
and
b) a new 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection of
claims 26 through 28 is entered pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant
to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1, 1997, by final
rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197 (Oct. 10, 1997), 1203
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007