Appeal No. 2007-0599
Application No. 10/822,054
that it would be clear from the specification at § 36 that “co-located means
in the same position or located very near to each other on the enclosure.”
(Reply Br. 7.)
Co-located is not defined in the specification. We adopt its ordinary
and customary meaning as set forth in a dictionary to mean “to set or place
together.”2 The Examiner’s interpretation of the term to encompass
configurations where the inlet and out are placed together on the same plane
is consistent with its dictionary meaning. We find no support in the
specification at § 36 that the term “co-located” requires the fluid inlet and
outlet to be “in the same position” as urged by Appellants (Reply Br. 7.),
rather than in the same plane. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of claims
6, 12, and 18.
TIME PERIOD
Regarding the affirmed rejection(s), 37 CFR § 41.52(a)(1) provides
“[a]ppellant may file a single request for rehearing within two months from
the date of the original decision of the Board.”
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection(s) of one or more
claims, this decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 41.50(b) (effective September 13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (August 12,
2004), 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (September 7, 2004)). 37 CFR
§ 41.50(b) provides “[a] new ground of rejection pursuant to this paragraph
shall not be considered final for judicial review.”
37 CFR § 41.50(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN TWO
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the
2 Id. at 264.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013