Appeal No. 2003-0667 Page 12
Application No. 09/514,699
invention is appropriately rejected for that reason. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 322, 13 USPQ2d
1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Because our reasoning is different than that of the Examiner, we designate our affirmance
with respect to the rejection of claim 10 as involving a new ground of rejection. 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b)(2002).
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1, 3-5, 7, and 9 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed. The decision of the Examiner to reject claim 10 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, ¶ 2 is also affirmed, however, we designate our affirmance with regard to claim 10 as
involving a new ground of rejection.
In addition to affirming the examiner’s rejection of one or more claims, this decision
contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1,
1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197 (Oct. 10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. &
Trademark Office 63, 122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides, “A new ground of
rejection shall not be considered final for purposes of judicial review.”
Regarding any affirmed rejection, 37 CFR § 1.197(b) provides:
(b) Appellants may file a single request for rehearing within two months from the
date of the original decision . . . .
37 CFR § 1.196(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN TWO MONTHS FROM
THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options with respect
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007