Application of David Bandel

The majority holds that estoppel exists against appellant as to claims 24, 25, 30 and 32 through 36. I cannot agree, for a number of reasons.

First, it is not at all clear from the majority opinion precisely what it is that appellant is thought to be estopped from doing with respect to those claims. The majority opinion implies, and the board specifically states, that “appellant is es-topped from now urging allowability to him of claims that are broader than those involved in the above noted interferences.” (Emphasis added.) This, of course, is simply not so. There is nothing in Title 35 of…