Appeal No. 2000-1675
Application No. 08/855,279
of prior art not relied upon to reject a claim was discussed on
the record with respect to the patentability of any claim. (See
Manual of Patenting Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 2242).
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
In view of the Examiner’s comments at page 9 of the Answer,
this case is being remanded to the Examiner to consider whether
any of the documents cited by Appellant in the Information
Disclosure Statement filed August 21, 1998, Paper No. 8, warrant
reopening of prosecution in this application. Particular
consideration should be given to JP 4-19809 which in the English
language Abstract, refers to a magnetoresistive element with a
“ . . . circular annular shape.” Since the limited disclosure in
the English language Abstract of these publications make a
meaningful consideration of the pertinence of the publications
indeterminate, the Examiner is required to obtain a full
translation of these publications which will be placed into the
record. In the application of prior art references against the
claims as a result of any resumption of prosecution of this
application before the Examiner, the Examiner’s statement of
rejection is required to include references to the full
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007