Appeal No. 1998-3087
Application 08/399,864
Rejection over Pritchett
Because appellants do not challenge the rejection of
claim 21 over Pritchett (brief, pages 3 and 5), we summarily
affirm this rejection.
REMAND
The independent claims in application no. 08/320,807 are
identical to those in the present case, but in that case
different species within these claims were elected. The board
affirmed the rejection of all claims in that application over the
applied references (appeal no. 1996-4069, mailed September 18,
2000) which, except for Coolbaugh, are the same references as in
the present case . We remand the application to the examiner to
consider rejecting the claims based upon rationale comparable to
that set forth by the board in application no. 08/320,807. 1
Furthermore, we note that the independent claims in the
present case are not limited to the elected species but, rather,
encompass the species which the board found in application no.
08/320,807 to have been fairly suggested to one of ordinary skill
in the art by the applied references. The examiner, therefore,
should consider rejecting the claims for this additional reason.
1 The examiner also should review the board decision in
related appeal no. 1997-4371, application no. 08/438,427.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007