Dated: June 29, 2007
 

Jed Margolin
Applicant, Appellant, pro se
1981 Empire Rd.
Reno, NV  89521-7430
(775) 847-7845
xxx@yyyy.zzz

    The Appellant Jed Margolin requests leave to include two items in the Addendum to his REQUEST FOR PANEL REHEARING mailed June 26, 2007. The two items are shown on pages 15-17 and are: 1) correspondence with Charles Petzold, Microsoft author and 2) a fax sent to Bill Gates, Microsoft Chairman.

    The Court’s decision released June 15, 2007, approved the Examiner’s use of the Microsoft Computer Dictionary. Although this issue was hotly contested during the prosecution of the case, this Court’s ruling in Phillips v. AWH appeared to have settled it, so it was not discussed in Margolin’s brief. Frankly, Margolin was surprised the Court allowed the use of a dictionary without providing any justification for ignoring the prosecution history of either Margolin or Ellis.

    The material requested to be included in the Addendum bears directly on the Examiner’s use of the Microsoft Computer Dictionary. Margolin feels that simply quoting the material is not sufficient for the following reason.

In the Court’s decision the Court made the statement that

With respect to the term “subscriber,” Mr. Margolin argues that the Board erred in finding that a device, rather than a person, could meet this term. The Board, however, did not make such a finding

Essentially, the Court called Margolin a liar.

    Margolin filed a Request For Rehearing to show the Court’s statement to be an error of fact since Margolin did not make this argument and Margolin’s true position is shown in the record.

    However, in the event Margolin’s request for a rehearing is granted the cloud of this untrue charge may be prejudicial to getting a fair hearing.

    Therefore, Margolin feels it necessary to include the email correspondence and fax in the Addendum to avoid the presumption that he is just making it up.

    In addition, the contact information in the documents will allow the Solicitor to verify their authenticity. Because the Solicitor has allowed the Patent Office to fabricate and tamper with evidence in this case (Gray Brief page 26) he will likely be quick to accuse others of doing the same.
 

Respectfully submitted,
 

Jed Margolin
June 29, 2007

    The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above foregoing and Attachments has been served on the Office of the Solicitor for the United States Patent and Trademark Office by United States Postal Service Express Mail Service to the address shown below:

Dated:  June 29, 2007

_________________

Jed Margolin

Office of the Solicitor
Post Office Box 15667
Arlington, VA  22215