Appeal 2006-0990
Application 10/209,369
CONCLUSION
In summary, the Examiner rejected claims 1-29 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b). We reverse the decision of the Examiner, but remand the
Application to the Examiner for further consideration of a rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
This Remand to the Examiner pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(a)(1) is
made for further consideration of a rejection. Accordingly, 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(a)(2) applies if a supplemental examiner's answer is written in
response to this Remand by the Board.
REVERSED
and
APPLICATION REMANDED
tf/cam
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge, Concurring:
I concur with the majority that the decision of the Examiner must be
reversed and the application remanded for further proceedings with respect
to issues raised under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). I do so for the following reasons.
The dispositive issue in this appeal with respect to § 102(b) is whether
as a matter of fact either or both of Warzelhan ‘045 and ‘248 prima facie
identically describe to one skilled in this art each and every element of the
claimed sulfonated aliphatic-aromatic copolyetherester polymer
encompassed by appealed claim 1, either expressly or under the principles of
11
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013