Appeal 2007-2050
Application 10/422,542
record by the Examiner, or (2) amended the Appeal Brief to remove any references
to the Richardson Declarations, if the Appellants chose not to rely on this evidence
in the appeal.
Although it appears from the arguments presented by the Appellants that
they wish for the Board to consider the Richardson Declarations, after having been
given an opportunity to submit these declarations to the Board for its consideration,
the Appellants chose not to do so. Although the Board could dismiss this Appeal
pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(d) for failure to correct the error in the original
Appeal Brief, rather than exercise this severe option, the Board is remanding the
application to the Examiner pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(a)(1) to allow the
Appellants an opportunity to file another amended appeal brief to correct this error.
We take this opportunity, however, to admonish Appellants’ counsel to familiarize
himself with the rules of the Board. As a practitioner registered to practice before
the USPTO, Appellants’ counsel is expected to understand and follow the Patent
Rules codified at 37 C.F.R., including the Part 41 regarding practice before the
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
ORDER
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the application is remanded to the
Examiner:
1) to hold the Appeal Brief of June 16, 2006 defective;
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013