Ex Parte Schramm

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 31, 2018

13234265 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 31, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/234,265 09/16/2011
52966 7590
Schramm-Personal-ACT
Michael R. Schramm
350 West
2000 South
Perry, UT 84302
02/02/2018
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Michael R. Schramm
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
MRS-030U 8393
EXAMINER
THOMAS, KAREEN KAY
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3728
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
02/02/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
mikeschramm@besstek.net
mschramm@juneaubiosciences.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte MICHAEL R. SCHRAMM
Appeal 2016-005611
Application 13/234,265
Technology Center 3700
Before CHARLES N. GREENHUT, LISA M. GUIJT, and
ERIC C. JESCHKE, Administrative Patent Judges.
GUIJT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant requests that we clarify our decision of November 27, 2017
("Decision"), in which we reversed, inter alia, the Examiner's decision to
reject claim 2 7.
ANALYSIS
Appellant identifies an error by the Board in the listing of the claims
in the DECISION section of the Decision, wherein the Board included claim
27 in both of the listings of the claims, i.e., as affirmed and reversed.
Decision 15. In the Decision, we did not sustain the Examiner's rejection of
independent claim 25, and therefore, we also did not sustain the Examiner's
Appeal 2016-005611
Application 13/234,265
rejection of claim 27, which depends from claim 25. See Decision 10
("[W]e do not sustain the Examiner's rejection of independent claim 25, and
claims 26 and 27 depending therefrom"); Appeal Br. 27 (Claims App'x)
(claim 27: "The container apparatus of claim 25, wherein .... "). Thus, we
erred by including claim 27 in the list of affirmed (or sustained) claims in
the Decision. The Examiner's rejection of claim 27 is reversed.
DECISION
We grant Appellant's Request for Rehearing.
GRANTED
2