Appeal 2007-1519
Application 10/177,837
62 USPQ2d 1209, 1211 (BPAI 2001). To enable our review, copies of cited
references are to be "placed in the application file . . . during the
prosecution." MPEP § 707.05(a) (8th ed., rev. 5, Aug. 2006). "This is
especially important for sources such as the Internet and online databases,"
id. § 707.05(e), because "the same document may not be available for
retrieval in the future." Id.
For its part, an "examiner's answer is required to include, under
appropriate headings . . . [a] listing of the evidence relied on (e.g., patents,
publications, admitted prior art), and, in the case of nonpatent references, the
relevant page or pages." Id. § 1207.02. In particular, citation of "[a]n
electronic document . . . that can be retrieved from an online source (e.g., the
Internet, online database, etc.)," id. § 707.05(e), shall include "the date when
the document was retrieved from the electronic media in square brackets
following after the date of publication, e.g., [retrieved on March 4, 1998],
[retrieved on 1998-03-04]. The four-digit year must always be given." Id.
III. ANALYSIS
Here, although the Examiner cites to "Driver Definition: http://
www.webopedia.com/TERM/d/driver.html; and utilized within driver
definition," (Answer 15), and "Program Definition: http://www.webopedia.
com/TERM/P/pro.qram.html" (id.), no copy of these definitions appears in
the application file. Such copies are needed for our review of the Examiner's
rejections. Likewise, the Evidence Relied Upon section of her Answer
(Answer 3) omits mention thereof. Furthermore, the date of publication and
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013