Appeal No. 2005-1826
Application No. 10/210,046
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Kanter in view of Hamilton.
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (filed
July 26, 2004 and January 18, 2005) and answer (mailed November
17, 2004) for the respective positions of the appellant and
examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.
DISCUSSION
I. Preliminary matter
The appellant (see pages 7 and 8 in the main brief) raises
as an issue on appeal the refusal of the examiner to enter the
amendment filed subsequent to final rejection on February 2,
2004. It is well settled, however, that the refusal of an
examiner to enter an amendment after final rejection is a matter
of discretion which is reviewable by petition to the Director
rather than by appeal to this Board. In re Mindick, 371 F.2d
892, 894, 152 USPQ 566, 568 (CCPA 1967). Hence, we shall not
address the merits of this matter.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims
1-5, 7, 9, 13 and 14-20
The examiner considers claims 1-5, 7, 9, 13 and 14-20 to be
indefinite because:
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007