Appeal 2007-0973
Application 10/254,835
Claim 27 is thus anticipated by Saitoh. The reference was found after
a cursory search of the U.S. patent database, and is thus not necessarily the
best available reference against the claim. In the event of further
prosecution of claims similar in scope to instant claim 27, the Examiner
should perform a full search to identify and apply the best reference.
CONCLUSION
The rejection of claims 1-28 under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Bowers is affirmed with respect to claims 1-26 and 28 but reversed
with respect to claim 27.
A new rejection of claim 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)(2) over Saitoh
is set forth herein.
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37
C.F.R. § 41.50(b) (2006). 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) provides “[a] new ground of
rejection pursuant to this paragraph shall not be considered final for judicial
review.”
37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) also provides that the Appellant, WITHIN TWO
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of
the following two options with respect to the new ground of rejection to
avoid termination of the appeal as to the rejected claims:
(1) Reopen prosecution. Submit an appropriate amendment of
the claims so rejected or new evidence relating to the claims so rejected, or
both, and have the matter reconsidered by the examiner, in which event the
proceeding will be remanded to the examiner. . . .
(2) Request rehearing. Request that the proceeding be reheard
under § 41.52 by the Board upon the same record. . . .
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013