Appeal No. 2006-0502 Παγε 6
Application No. 10/051,970
appellants’ specification, should be given primacy in determining
the meaning thereof in determining the broadest reasonable scope
of the claimed subject matter consistent with current patent
jurisprudence.
In light of the above, this application is not in condition
for a decision on appeal at this time. On return of this
application, the examiner should take appropriate action to
correct the deficiencies identified above.
This remand to the examiner pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 41.50(a)(1) is made for further consideration of a rejection.
Accordingly, 37 CFR § 41.50(a)(2) applies if a supplemental
examiner’s answer is written in response to this remand by the
Board.
Additionally, this application, by virtue of its “special”
status, requires an immediate action. See MPEP § 708.01(D)(8th
ed., Rev. 2, May 2004). Thus, it is important that the Board be
promptly informed of any action affecting the appeal in this
case.
REMANDED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007