Appeal 2007-1341
Application 09/894,065
37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) also provides that the Appellants, WITHIN TWO
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the
following two options with respect to the new grounds of rejection to avoid
termination of proceedings (37 C.F.R. § 1.197 (b)) 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
37 C.F.R. § 41.52 by the Board upon the same record …
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Based on the findings of facts and analysis above, we conclude that:
(1) The Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 1, 3-10, 12-14, 16-21, and
23-31 for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
(2) Claims 14, 16-20, and 30 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 112
because they are indefinite.
(3) Claims 21, 23-27, and 31 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101
because they are directed to non-statutory subject matter.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 3-10, 12-14, 16-21, and 23-31 for
anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is affirmed.
Claims 14, 16-20, and 30 are rejected as being indefinite under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
Claims 21, 23-27, and 31 are rejected as being directed to non-
statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
17
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013