Court Opinion

ID: 9448696
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 23:43:06.475988+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:31.842526
License: Public Domain

MARTIN, Judge
(concurring).
I agree with the majority that the board erred in rejecting on 35 U.S.C. § 103 the claims at bar since the rejections were based on meanings of the claims which were established by “speculative assumptions” of the board. However, I know of no statute, nor does the majority cite one, which gives this court the authority to point out to the board a possible new basis for rejection that the board may have overlooked in this case.1 It seems to me that such judicial prompting is unwarranted. In my opinion this court has no right to take this action which may affect adversely litigants’ rights in the claims as drawn.

. No statutory authority is cited by this court for taking similar action in In re Citron, 251 F.2d 619, 45 C.C.P.A. 773.