Ex Parte Gertner

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jul 23, 2003

08621215 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 23, 2003)

1 Application for patent filed March 25, 1996, entitled
"Angled Port Loudspeaker," which is a file-wrapper-continuation
of Application 08/422,779, filed April 17, 1995, now abandoned,
which is a file-wrapper-continuation of Application 08/063,136,
filed May 17, 1993, now abandoned.
- 1 -
The opinion in support of the decision being
entered today was not written for publication
and is not binding precedent of the Board.
_______________
Paper No. 42
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES

Ex parte STEPHEN J. GERTNER, JR.

Appeal No. 2001-2183
Application 08/621,2151

HEARD: January 16, 2003

Before BARRETT, DIXON, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent
Judges.
BARRETT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
Appellant filed a "REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER
37 C.F.R. § 1.197" (Paper No. 40) on April 9, 2003, requesting
that we designate our affirmances of rejections based on Mae in
Appeal No. 2001-2183
Application 08/621,215
- 2 -
our decision (Paper No. 39) entered February 11, 2003, as new
grounds of rejection under 37 CFR § 1.196(b). Appellant also
simultaneously filed an amendment (Paper No. 41), amending
independent claims 1 and 16, with the request for rehearing.
Appellant argues that the Board adopted an interpretation of
the "enclosure" in Mae in the affirmance of prior art rejections
based on Mae either alone or in combination with Veranth or
Sakai, which was radically different from the interpretation
relied upon by the examiner. It is argued that appellant has not
had a fair opportunity to respond to this new interpretation.
After due consideration, we agree that our interpretation of
Mae is so different from the interpretation advanced by the
examiner that it amounts to a new ground of rejection.
Accordingly, we grant appellant's request for rehearing and
designate the affirmed rejections based on Mae in our original
decision as new grounds of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b). Appellant's amendment (Paper No. 41) is a response
under § 1.196(b)(1), which amendment must be entered and
considered by the examiner to determine whether it overcomes the
new grounds of rejection. Pursuant to the procedure in
§ 1.196(b)(1), the application is remanded to the examiner for
consideration of the amendment.
Appeal No. 2001-2183
Application 08/621,215
- 3 -
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
GRANTED AND REMANDED
LEE E. BARRETT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH L. DIXON ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Appeal No. 2001-2183
Application 08/621,215
- 4 -
ADAMS & WILKS
50 BROADWAY
31ST FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10004