Appeal No. 2006-2248
Application No. 10/158,618
Examiner's rejection
50. The Examiner rejected reissue application claims 1-19 under
35 U.S.C. § 251 for a defective reissue declaration.
51. The Examiner reasoned as follows (see Examiner's Answer
entered July 26, 2004, page 3):
The reissue oath/declaration filed with this application dated 4/16/03 is
defective because [(1)] it fails to point out at least one specific error [in the
patent sought to be reissued, ] and [(2)] there is no reference [in the reissue
declaration to the Declaration filed by Andrea L. Colby in the Reissue
declaration or incorporation reference of the [Colby Declaration], and [(3)] it
does not contain a statement that all errors which are being corrected in the
reissue application up to the time of filing of the oath/declaration arose
without any deceptive intention on the part of the applicant.
52. The “Reissue Application Declaration” filed April 16, 2003
contains the following statement at page 3:
That the error listed above, which are being corrected, up to the time of the
filing of this reissue declaration arose without any deceptive intention on the
part of the applicant.
53. The record supports the Examiner's first and second findings
with respect to what the reissue declaration fails to point out or reference.
54. The record does not support the Examiner's third finding with
respect to what the reissue declaration fails to contain. See Finding of Fact 52.
- 15 -
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007