Appeal 2006-2681
Application 10/044,407
deficiency in the Brief, Appellants on July 12, 2006 filed a letter indicating,
“no evidence has been submitted in support of this appeal.” As such,
Appellants did not include a copy of the declaration referenced in the Brief.
A Declaration filed October 1, 2004 is part of the official Image File
Wrapper (IFW) for this application. However, it is not clear whether
Appellants intended to include a new declaration with the Brief or rely on
the declaration filed October 1, 2004.
In order for the merits panel of the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences (BPAI) to review the record on appeal, the document relied
upon must be properly identified and referenced. It is important that the
record presented to the BPAI for consideration be the same as the record
established by the Examiner and the Appellants. A meaningful review of
this record cannot occur unless all of the documents submitted by Appellants
for consideration have been adequately presented into the Appeal record.
The Examiner has relied on the SU 1743887-A1 reference as evidence
of obviousness. A close inspection of the record reveals that only a Derwent
Abstract of this document is present. This abstract of the SU 1743887-A1
reference is not proper for a determination of patentable subject matter by
the BPAI. It is noted that the Appellants on pages 6 to 9 of the Brief discuss
the contents of this cited document. However, the abstract presented does
not include the full details of the underlying document. The Examiner is
instructed to obtain the full SU 1743887-A1 document.1 Upon receipt of
this document, the Examiner should reevaluate the relevance of the entire
1 The Examiner should translate this document to the English language if
necessary.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007