Ex Parte Yun

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Aug 12, 2008

09878373 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 12, 2008)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte KEYONG-SEOK YUN
____________

Appeal 2008-0596
Application 09/878,3731
Technology Center 2100
____________

Decided: August 12, 2008
____________

Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, JEAN R. HOMERE,
and JAY P. LUCAS, Administrative Patent Judges.

HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judge.

ORDER REMANDING TO THE EXAMINER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1 through 14. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).

1 Filed on June 12, 2001. The real party in interest is LG Electronics, Inc.
1
Appeal 2008-0596
Application 10/248,785

The Examiner entered a new ground of rejection against claims 6
through 11 and 13 as being anticipated by Priestman under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

PRINCIPLES OF LAW
Failure To Reply to a New Ground of Rejection
If Appellant fails to timely file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 or a Reply
Brief in response to an Examiner’s Answer that contains a new ground of
rejection, the appeal will be sua sponte dismissed as to the claims subject to
the new ground of rejection. The dismissal of the appeal as to those claims
operates as an authorization to cancel those claims and the appeal continues
as to the remaining claims. The Examiner may use form paragraph
12.179.02 to dismiss the claims subject to the new ground of rejection. See
MPEP § 1207.03 (V) (8th ed., Rev. 6, Sep. 2007).

ANALYSIS
The Examiner entered a new ground of rejection against claims 6
through 11 and 13 in the Examiner’s Answer of January 12, 2007. In
response, Appellant filed a Reply Brief along with a petition for late entry on
March 14, 2007. Appellant’s petition was denied on June 27, 2007, and the
Reply Brief was not deemed as being timely filed. Consequently, the appeal
is sua sponte dismissed with regard to claims 6 through 11 and 13.

2
Appeal 2008-0596
Application 09/878,373

ORDER
Accordingly, we REMAND this application to the Examiner to:
(1) cancel the claims subject to the new ground of rejection; and
(2) notify the Appellants that the appeal as to the claims subject to the
new ground of rejection is dismissed and those claims are canceled.

REMANDED

pgc

KED & ASSOCIATES, LLP
P.O. Box 221200
Chantilly VA 20153-1200
3