Appeal 2007-1681
Application 10/613,371
is treated as an authorization to cancel the withdrawn claims.” MPEP §§
1214.05 and 1215.03 (8th ed., Rev. 5, August 2006).
37 C.F.R. § 41.37(d) (2006) provides that Appellant will be notified
of any deficiency in the Brief under the rules and provided with the
opportunity to correct the deficiency. See MPEP § 1205.03 (8th ed., Rev. 5,
August 2006).
Accordingly, the Examiner is required to take appropriate action
consistent with current examining practice and procedure to notify Appellant
of the deficiency in the Brief with respect to the ground of rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, and provide Appellant with the opportunity to
cure the same in order to avoid withdrawal of the appeal and its
consequences with respect to appealed claim 2, with a view toward placing
this Application in condition for decision on appeal with respect to the issues
presented.
This Remand is not made for the purpose of directing the Examiner to
further consider the grounds of rejection. Accordingly, 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(a)(2) (2007) does not apply.
We hereby remand this application to the Examiner, via the Office of
a Director of the Technology Center, for appropriate action in view of the
above comments.
REMANDED
clj
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013