Appeal No. 2004-1579
Application No. 09/496,549
Initially, we note that this request is filed pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.197(b) which
provides:
Appellant may file a single request for rehearing within two months from
the date of the original decision, unless the original decision is so modified
by the decision on rehearing as to become, in effect, a new decision, and
the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences so states. The request for
rehearing must state with particularity the points believed to have been
misapprehended or overlooked in rendering the decision and also state all
other grounds upon which rehearing is sought. See § 1.136(b) for
extensions of time for seeking rehearing in a patent application and §
1.550(c) for extensions of time for seeking rehearing in a reexamination
proceeding. (emphasis added)
Appellants direct our attention to the portion of our decision wherein we stated:
. . . appellant has not directed our attention to evidence that the term
“termination unit” has a special meaning to persons skilled in the art (page
3 of decision).
In response, appellant argues that the term “termination unit” does have a special
meaning and relies on Newton’s Telecom Dictionary and a Verizon definition which are
discussed for the first time in the request for rehearing.
We remind appellant that a request for rehearing is limited to points that were
misapprehended or overlooked by this panel in rendering the original decision. As this
evidence was not before the Board when the original decision was rendered it could not
have been overlooked. As such, appellant’s request fails on this basis alone.
Further, as this evidence was not relied on in the brief or the reply brief
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007