Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 25, 2010 / Notices 29321 

tribes.’’ NOAA and DOI are committed 

to consultations with tribes as part of 

the national system development 

process. 

Addendum: From ‘‘Framework for the 

National System of Marine Protected 

Areas of the United States’’ National 

System Goals and Priority Conservation 

Objectives 

Goal 1: For Natural Heritage Marine 

Resources—Advance comprehensive 

conservation and management of the nation’s 

biological communities, habitats, ecosystems, 

and processes and the ecological services, 

uses, and values they provide to present and 

future generations through ecosystem-based 

MPA approaches. 

Priority Conservation Objectives for Goal 

1—Conserve and manage: 

• Key reproduction areas and nursery 

grounds 

• Key biogenic habitats 

• Areas of high species and/or habitat 

diversity 

• Ecologically important geological 

features and enduring/recurring 

oceanographic features 

• Critical habitat of threatened and 

endangered species 

• Unique or rare species, habitats and 

associated communities 

• Key areas for migratory species 

• Linked areas important to life histories 

• Key areas that provide compatible 

opportunities for education and research 

Goal 2: For Cultural Heritage Marine 

Resources—Advance comprehensive 

conservation and management of cultural 

resources that reflect the nation’s maritime 

history and traditional cultural connections 

to the sea, as well as the uses and values they 

provide to present and future generations 

through ecosystem-based MPA approaches. 

Priority Conservation Objectives for Goal 

2—Conserve and manage: 

• Key cultural and historic resources listed 

on the National Register of Historic Places 

(NRHP) 

• Key cultural and historic resources 

determined eligible for the NRHP or listed on 

a State Register 

• Key cultural sites that are paramount to 

a culture’s identity and/or survival 

• Key cultural and historic sites that may 

be threatened 

• Key cultural and historic sites that can 

be utilized for heritage tourism 

• Key cultural and historic sites that are 

underrepresented 

Goal 3: For Sustainable Production Marine 

Resources—Advance comprehensive 

conservation and management of the nation’s 

renewable living resources and their habitats 

(including, but not limited to, spawning, 

mating, and nursery grounds and areas 

established to minimize bycatch of species) 

and the social, cultural, and economic values 

and services they provide to present and 

future generations through ecosystem-based 

MPA approaches. 

Priority Conservation Objectives for Goal 

3—Conserve and manage: 

• Key reproduction areas, including larval 

sources and nursery grounds 

• Key areas that sustain or restore highpriority fishing grounds 

• Key areas for maintaining natural age/sex 

structure of important harvestable species 

• Key foraging grounds 

• Key areas that mitigate the impacts of 

bycatch 

• Key areas that provide compatible 

opportunities for education and research 

Dated: May 17, 2010. 

Donna Wieting, 

Director, Office of Ocean and Coastal 

Resource Management. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12452 Filed 5–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

[Docket No.: PTO–P–2010–0046] 

Streamlined Procedure for Appeal 

Brief Review in Ex Parte 

Reexamination Proceedings 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO) is 

streamlining the procedure for the 

review of appeal briefs in ex parte 

reexamination proceeding appeals to 

increase the efficiency of the appeal 

process and reduce pendency of 

appeals. The Chief Judge of the Board of 

Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) 

or his designee (collectively, ‘‘Chief 

Judge’’), will have the sole responsibility 

for determining whether appeal briefs 

filed in ex parte reexamination 

proceeding appeals comply with the 

applicable regulations, and will 

complete the determination before the 

appeal brief is forwarded to the 

examiner for consideration. The 

examiner will no longer review appeal 

briefs for compliance with the 

applicable regulations. The USPTO 

expects to achieve a reduction in ex 

parte reexamination proceeding appeal 

pendency as measured from the filing of 

a notice of appeal to docketing of the 

appeal by eliminating duplicate reviews 

by the examiner and the BPAI. We are 

expecting further reduction in pendency 

because the streamlined procedure will 

increase consistency in the 

determination, and thereby reduce the 

number of notices of noncompliant 

appeal brief and non-substantive returns 

from the BPAI that require appellants to 

file corrected appeal briefs in ex parte 

reexamination proceeding appeals. 

DATES: Effective Date: The procedures 

set forth in this notice are effective on 

May 25, 2010. 

Applicability Date: The appeal brief 

review procedure set forth in this notice 

is applicable to appeal briefs filed in ex 

parte reexamination proceedings on or 

after May 25, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Krista Zele, Case Management 

Administrator, Board of Patent Appeals 

and Interferences, by telephone at (571) 

272–9797 or by electronic mail at: 

BPAI.Review@uspto.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

streamlined procedure for appeal brief 

review, upon the filing of an appeal 

brief in ex parte reexamination 

proceeding appeals, the Chief Judge will 

review the appeal brief to determine 

whether the appeal brief complies with 

37 CFR 41.37 before it is forwarded to 

the Central Reexamination Unit or other 

Technology Center examiner for 

consideration. The Chief Judge will 

endeavor to complete this determination 

within one month from the filing of the 

appeal brief. To assist regular ex parte 

appeal appellants in complying with 37 

CFR 41.37, the BPAI has previously 

posted checklists for notices of appeal 

and appeal briefs and a list of eight 

reasons ex parte appeal briefs have been 

held to be noncompliant, on the USPTO 

Web site at: [http://www.uspto.gov/ip/ 

boards/bpai/procedures/ 

guidance_noncompliant_briefs.jsp]. If 

the appeal brief is determined to be 

compliant with 37 CFR 41.37, the Chief 

Judge will accept the appeal brief and 

forward it to the examiner for 

consideration. If the Chief Judge 

determines that the appeal brief is not 

compliant with 37 CFR 41.37 and sends 

appellant a notice of noncompliant brief 

requiring a corrected brief, appellant 

will be required to file a corrected brief 

within the time period set forth in the 

notice to avoid the dismissal of the 

appeal. See 37 CFR 41.37(d). The Chief 

Judge will also have the sole 

responsibility for determining whether 

corrected briefs comply with 37 CFR 

41.37, and will address any inquiries 

and petitions regarding notices of 

noncompliant briefs. 

The Chief Judge’s responsibility for 

determining whether appeal briefs 

comply with 37 CFR 41.37 is not 

considered a transfer of jurisdiction 

when an appeal brief is filed, but rather 

is only a transfer of the specific 

responsibility of notifying appellant 

under 37 CFR 41.37(d) of the reasons for 

non-compliance. The Patent Examining 

Corps retains the jurisdiction over the 

ex parte reexamination proceeding to 

consider the appeal brief, conduct an 

appeal conference, draft an examiner’s 

answer, and decide the entry of 

amendments, evidence, and information 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
29322 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 25, 2010 / Notices 

disclosure statements filed after the 

final rejection or after the filing of a 

notice of appeal. Furthermore, petitions 

concerning the refusal to enter 

amendments and/or evidence remain 

delegated to the Patent Examining Corps 

as provided in the Manual of Patent 

Examining Procedure (MPEP) 

1002.02(b) and (c). 

Once the Chief Judge accepts the 

appeal brief as compliant, an examiner’s 

answer will be provided in the ex parte 

reexamination proceeding if the 

examiner determines that the appeal 

should be maintained. The examiner 

will treat all pending, rejected claims as 

being on appeal. If the notice of appeal 

or appeal brief identifies fewer than all 

of the rejected claims as being appealed, 

the issue will be addressed by the BPAI 

panel. The jurisdiction of the ex parte 

reexamination proceeding will be 

transferred to the BPAI when a 

docketing notice is entered after the 

time period for filing a reply brief 

expires or the examiner acknowledges 

the receipt and entry of the reply brief. 

After taking jurisdiction, the BPAI will 

not return or remand the ex parte 

reexamination proceeding to the Patent 

Examining Corps for issues related to a 

noncompliant appeal brief. 

This notice does not apply to inter 

partes reexamination proceedings. The 

Office is considering a streamlined 

procedure for review of briefs filed in 

inter partes reexamination proceedings, 

in which the Chief Judge will also have 

the sole responsibility for determining 

whether briefs filed in inter partes 

reexamination proceedings comply with 

37 CFR 41.37, 41.67, 41.68, and 41.71. 

Dated: May 18, 2010. 

David J. Kappos, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12534 Filed 5–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Base Closure and Realignment 

AGENCY: Office of Economic 

Adjustment, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice is provided 

pursuant to section 2905(b)(7)(B)(ii) of 

the Defense Base Closure and 

Realignment Act of 1990. It provides a 

partial list of military installations 

closing or realigning pursuant to the 

2005 Base Closure and Realignment 

(BRAC) Report. It also provides a 

corresponding listing of the Local 

Redevelopment Authorities (LRA) for 

the Air Force Research Laboratory, 

Arizona, and portions of the Newport 

Naval Complex, Rhode Island, 

recognized by the Secretary of Defense, 

acting through the Department of 

Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment 

(OEA), as well as the point of contact, 

address, and telephone number for the 

LRA for each installation. 

Representatives of State and local 

governments, homeless providers, and 

other parties interested in the 

redevelopment of the installation 

should contact the person or 

organization listed. The following 

information will also be published 

simultaneously in a newspaper of 

general circulation in the area of the 

installation. 

DATES: Effective May 25, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Director, Office of Economic 

Adjustment, Office of the Secretary of 

Defense, 400 Army Navy Drive, Suite 

200, Arlington, VA 22202–4704, (703) 

604–6020. 

Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) 

Arizona 

Installation Name: Air Force Research 

Laboratory. 

LRA Name: City of Mesa. 

Point of Contact: Patrick Murphy, 

Project Manager, City of Mesa Economic 

Development. 

Address: 20 E. Main Street, Suite 200, 

P.O. Box 1466, Mesa, AZ 85211–1466. 

Phone: (480) 644–3964. 

E-mail address: 

patrick.murphy@mesaaz.gov. 

Rhode Island 

Installation Name: Newport Naval 

Complex. 

LRA Name: Aquidneck Island Reuse 

Planning Authority (AIRPA). 

Point of Contact: Tina Dolen, 

Executive Director, Aquidneck Island 

Reuse Planning Authority. 

Address: 437 Broadway, Newport, RI 

02840–1739. 

Phone: (401) 845–9299. 

E-mail Address: 

tina@acquidneckplanning.org. 

Dated: May 20, 2010. 

Mitchell S. Bryman, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12521 Filed 5–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Advisory Committee; 

Department of Defense Wage 

Committee; Closed Meeting 

AGENCY: Civilian Personnel 

Management Service (Wage and Salary 

Division), DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of 

section 10 of Public Law 92–463, the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, DoD 

announces the Department of Defense 

Wage Committee will meet in closed 

session on June 1, 2010, in Rosslyn, 

Virginia. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on June 

1, 2010, at 10 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

1400 Key Boulevard, Level A, Room 

A101, Rosslyn, Virginia 22209–5144. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Craig Jerabek, Designated Federal 

Officer for the Department of Defense 

Wage Committee, 1400 Key Boulevard, 

Suite A105, Arlington, Virginia 22209– 

5144, Telephone: (703) 696–1735, Fax: 

(703) 696–5472, E-mail: 

craig.jerabek@cpms.osd.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

provisions of section 10(d) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972, Public Law 92–463, it is hereby 

determined that every Wage Committee 

meeting concerns matters listed in 5 

U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and 5 U.S.C. 

552b(c)(4), and that, accordingly, the 

meeting will be closed to the public. 

Purpose of Meeting 

The Committee will receive, review, 

and consider wage survey 

specifications, wage survey data, local 

wage survey committee reports and 

recommendations, and wage schedules 

derived there from. 

Request for Waiver 

Due to unforeseen difficulties, the 

Designated Federal Officer was unable 

to process the Federal Register notice 

for the June 1, 2010, meeting of the 

Department of Defense Wage 

Committee, as required by 41 CFR 102– 

3.150(a). Accordingly, the Committee 

Management Officer for the Department 

of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102– 

3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day 

notification requirement. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES