Appeal No. 2002-2283
Application No. 08/882,513
are not claimed, “preparation of haloamine electrophiles”
are claimed.
Appellants’ Appeal Brief (Paper No. 28) states the status of
the claims as follows (AB 1):
The present appeal involves Claims 1-10, 20-22
and 26-32, which are currently under a final rejection
as set forth in the second final Office Action dated
May 24, 2000.
Appellants contest the propriety of the examiner’s conclusion that
pending Claims 1-10, 20-22, and 26-32 are unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of Hayase et al., CA 111:153338 (abstract
of JP 63227552). In the Examiner’s Answer, however, the examiner
maintains that “Claim 32 filed after Final rejection was not
entered” (EA 2), “Claim 32 was not entered and is not under
consideration” (EA 3), and “Claims 1-10, 20-22 and 26-31 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hayase et
al.” (EA 4). In our view, the examiner never rejected pending
Claim 32. Therefore, no rejection of Claim 32 is before us in this
appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134. Such lapses in prosecution often
result from casual use of form paragraphs.
2. The Examiner’s Answer suggests that “[t]he brief does
not contain a statement identifying the related appeals and
interferences which will directly affect or be directly affected
by or have a bearing on the decision in the pending appeal is
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007