Appeal No. 2004-0529
Application No. 09/328,931
what appears to be an essential attribute of the assembly for
achieving lift, i.e., --horizontal-- translation. The
specification, in the amendment to page 2, line 12, specifically
sets forth that translational "horizontal" motion effects lift.4
In summary, this panel of the Board has procedurally
reversed all of the anticipation rejections on appeal, and has
introduced a new ground of rejection.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to
37 CFR § 41.50(b) (effective September 13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg.
49960 (August 12, 2004), 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (September
7, 2004)). 37 CFR § 41.50(b) provides "[a] new ground of
rejection pursuant to this paragraph shall not be considered
final for judicial review."
4 At odds with this recitation in the specification are the
statements in the respective papers titled as declarations under
§ 1.132 of Morris, Miller, and Schrage submitted by appellant.
The referenced statements clearly indicate that an angle of
attack for the virtual disk is needed to generate lift. We note
that each of the above declarations is not compliant with 37 CFR
§ 1.68 or Section 1746 of Title 28 of the United States Code; See
MPEP Section 602.03.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007