Appeal 2007-2995
Application 10/998,567
(e) The time periods set forth in this section are
extendable under the provisions of § 1.136 of this title for
patent applications and § 1.550(c) of this title for ex parte
reexamination proceedings.
Accordingly, this proceeding is remanded to the Examiner to
either (1) require that Appellant file an amended brief in compliance
with 37 C.F.R. § 41.37 that is without reference to unentered
evidence, or (2) indicate entry of the published application submitted
as evidence after appeal and provide a supplemental examiner’s
answer that addresses the evidence and Appellant’s arguments in
reliance on the evidence.
Current Office policy requires that any supplemental answer be
approved and signed by a Technology Center Director or designee.
See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 1211.01 (8th
ed., Rev. 5, Aug. 2006).
If a supplemental examiner’s answer is written in response to
this remand, failure by Appellant to exercise one of the two options
specified by 37 CFR § 41.50(a)(2) (2007) will result in sua sponte
dismissal of the appeal as to all the claims that are rejected.
We also note that Appellant’s Reply Brief (filed Nov. 21, 2006)
refers to computer simulation waveforms (“Figs. A-L”) that were
apparently filed with the Reply Brief but were not scanned into the
image file wrapper.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013