Appeal No. 2001-2377 Page 7
Application No. 08/967,023
view that Nakagomi is anticipatory, or to claim 3, wherein explicit suggestion is present to
form the grooves by compression.
In arriving at the aforementioned conclusions, we have carefully considered all of the
arguments set out by the appellants. However, they have not persuaded us that the claims
are patentable over the applied prior art.
SUMMARY
The rejection is sustained.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed but designated as a new rejection under
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 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 63,122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR §
1.196(b) provides, “A new ground of rejection shall not be considered final for purposes of
judicial review.”
37 CFR § 1.196(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN TWO MONTHS
FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options with
respect to the new ground of rejection to avoid termination of proceedings (37 CFR
§ 1.197(c)) as to the rejected claims:
(1) Submit an appropriate amendment of the claims so rejected or a
showing of facts relating to the claims so rejected, or both, and have the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007