Appeal No. 2001-0421
Application 08/926,835
examiner to pursue extraordinary relief in response to our
actions today. Yet, he has not provided appellants any assurance
that they even have his vote on the issues as they are presented
on the existing record. Why should appellants expend their time
and resources in pursuit of the suggested relief only to discover
that they never had a single vote on the panel?
Our colleague’s actions appear to indicate his belief that
he can or should only react to what the majority has decided and
written in its supporting opinion. We do not believe that to be
the case. Each member of the panel has an independent vote on
the issues presented and any panel member may write separately to
express his or her views on a matter as our colleague does here.
Stating his view that claim 1 is broad, not indefinite, does not
provide a sufficient claim construction so that the prior art can
be properly applied.
Nor do we find our colleague’s view that claim 1 is
susceptible to only two interpretations to be controlling.
Assuming that to be the case, we do not find it sufficient to
mandate imposition of a specific construction at this point in
time. We do not have a record from which we can choose or
receive guidance from a well reasoned exchange of views between
appellants and the examiner as to claim construction and
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007