The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and is not binding
precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte DANIEL J. SORENSEN
and ROBERT LEE POPP
______________
Appeal No. 2006-1892
Application 09/849,594
_______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before GARRIS, WARREN and TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
We remand the application to the examiner for consideration and explanation of issues
raised by the record. 37 CFR §41.50(a)(1) (2005); Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
(MPEP) § 1211 (8th ed., Rev. 3, August 2005).
The official electronic records of the USPTO contain the following documents for this
application:
Examiner’s answer mailed April 21, 2005;
Reply brief filed June 10, 2005;
Supplemental examiner’s answer mailed June 20, 2005, differing solely from the answer by the
addition of the initials of the second conferee on the signature page;
Supplemental reply brief filed August 18, 2005, presenting additional arguments augmenting
arguments in the reply brief; and
Examiner’s communication mailed November 10, 2005, stating that “[t]he [supplemental] reply
brief filed 8/18/05 has been entered and considered . . . [and] forwarded to the Board.”
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007