Appeal No. 2003-0454 Page 13
Application No. 09/644,734
consider searching for any prior art that teaches to commence dressing when the rate
or quality of polishing has dropped below acceptable levels. If such a teaching is
discovered, the examiner should determine the patentability of claims 11, 24, 53, 64, 76
and 77.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to 7, 10, 12 to 20,
23, 25 to 37, 45 to 52, 54 to 63 and 65 to 75 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed and
the decision of the examiner to reject claims 11, 24, 38 to 44, 53, 64, 76 and 77 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. In addition, a new rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, has been added pursuant to provisions of 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b). Lastly, the application has been remanded to the examiner for further
consideration.
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides that, "[a] new ground of rejection shall not be considered
final for purposes of judicial review."
37 CFR § 1.196(b) also provides that the appellants, WITHIN TWO MONTHS
FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007