Appeal 2006-3344
Application 10/202,150
In particular, we remand this application to the Examiner to clarify the
record as to the status of all of the pending claims and as to the rejections
being maintained by the Examiner.
Procedural History
In the Final Rejection mailed November 16, 2005, the Examiner
presented:
(1) a rejection of claims 1, 4-6, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, and 23 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Getter (WO 00/12301) in view of
Paeglis (US 4,737,213);
(2) a rejection of claims 3, 9, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Getter (WO 00/12301) in view of Paeglis (US 4,737,213)
and further in view of 3M Scotchlite Reflective Material-High Gloss Series
6200 Product Bulletin (3M);
(3) a rejection of claims 13 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Getter (WO 00/12301) in view of Paeglis (US 4,737,213)
and further in view of Rega (US 6,054, 208).
On the first page of the Brief filed on March 13, 2006, Appellants
indicate that appeal is being taken from the Examiner’s final rejection of
claims 1, 3-6, 9, 11-19, and 23. However, the Appeal Brief only presents
arguments against the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of claims 1, 4-6, 11, 12,
15, 16, 18, 19, and 23, albeit the claims appendix includes claims 3, 9, 13,
14, and 17 and all of claims 1, 3-6, 9, 11-19, and 23 are listed as being
rejected in the “STATUS OF THE CLAIMS” section of the Brief (Br. 2).
In the Answer mailed May 16, 2006, the Examiner agrees with the
rejected status of the claims as presented by Appellants in the Brief. The
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013