Appeal No. 1998-2673
Application 08/557,138
entered. Indeed, claim 30, as reproduced in the appendix to
the appellants’ brief is written as dependent from claim 1 and
is accompanied by a footnote indicating that it would depend
from claim 19, had a post-final amendment been permitted
entry. The appellants address claim 30 in the brief as though
it depends
from claim 19 (brief, page 4). Notwithstanding, the examiner
has not repeated the rejection of claims 30 through 33 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. Seemingly, the examiner
accepts that, should the appellants be successful on this
appeal, they will amend claim 30 to depend from claim 19, and
has dropped the § 112 rejection accordingly. In light of
these comments, we, too, shall treat the rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as having been dropped and
treat claim 30 as though it depends from claim 19.
The subject matter of the claims on appeal is directed to
a value-bearing document. Despite the appellants’ and
examiner’s indication to the contrary, the copy of claim 19 in
the brief is not a correct copy of the claim involved in the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007