When may an appellant request that prosecution be reopened pursuant to § 41.50(a)(2) in response to a supplemental examiner’s answer?
Appellant may request to reopen prosecution only if (1) a supplemental examiner’s answer is written in response to a remand by the Board; (2) the remand is for further consideration of a rejection; and (3) the remand is on or after the effective date. If the Board does not remand the application to the examiner or the remand is for another reason (e.g., for consideration of a new issue raised in a reply brief), the appellant cannot request that prosecution be reopened under § 41.50(a)(2) in response to a supplemental examiner’s answer. H2. If the examiner writes a supplemental examiner’s answer responding to a new issue raised in a reply brief, and then the appellant files a second reply brief that raises another new issue, can the examiner provide a second supplemental examiner’s answer to respond to the new issue raised in the second reply brief? Yes, with the Technology Center Director’s, or his or her designee’s, approval.
Related Questions
- Can the Office deny a request to reopen prosecution under § 41.39(b)(1) when appellant files a reply in compliance with § 1.111 in response to a new ground of rejection in an examiner’s answer?
- Do all remands from the Board in which the examiner introduces a supplemental examiners answer provide appellant the opportunity to have the prosecution reopened under 37 CFR 41.50?
- When may an appellant request that prosecution be reopened pursuant to § 41.50(a)(2) in response to a supplemental examiner’s answer?
