Appeal No. 2000-0950 Page 5
Application No. 08/925,247
In response to the remand, a supplemental examiner's answer was mailed on
September 24, 2001 (Paper No. 14). The appellant did not file a supplemental reply
brief to respond to the position of the examiner as set forth in the supplemental answer.
On April 22, 2002, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(d), we ordered the appellant to
clarify the record by addressing the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as set
forth in the supplemental examiner's answer (Paper No. 16). Specifically, we ordered
the appellant to provide an argument specifying the error(s) in the rejection, or other
reasons which cause the rejection to be in error.
In response to the order, a supplemental reply brief was filed on June 4, 2002
(Paper No. 17). This supplemental reply brief specified the errors in the rejection of
claim 1 and the reasons which cause that rejection to be in error.
On July 29, 2002, we remanded this application to the examiner (Paper No. 18),
pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(a) and Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP)
§ 1211, for consideration of the supplemental reply brief filed on June 4, 2002.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007