Appeal No. 2002-0621
Application 08/770,381
OPINION
Our original decision found the § 131 Declaration filed
July 3, 2001, listed as Paper No. 17 on the file, not properly
executed and, therefore, does not meet the requirements under
37 CFR § 1.131. The request for rehearing does not argue with
our finding that the July 3, 2001, § 131 Declaration is
defective, but instead, Appellants have submitted a newly signed
Declaration for our consideration.
Reconsideration under 37 CFR § 1.197(b) must be based
upon the same record as the original decision. It is not a
vehicle for introducing new evidence that has not been entered
and has not been considered by the Examiner. In Ex parte
Hindersinn, 177 USPQ 78, 80 (Bd. App. 1971), it was held that a
new argument advanced in a request for reconsideration but not
advanced in the brief or reply brief is not properly before the
Board because an argument advanced in such a manner has not
afforded the Examiner an opportunity to respond to the new
argument. “A party cannot wait until after the Board has
rendered an adverse decision and then present new arguments in a
request for reconsideration.” Cooper v. Goldfarb, 154 F.3d 1321,
1331, 47 USPQ2d 1896, 1904 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007