P, a registered patent practitioner, filed a reply to a first Office action which rejected all claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) based on an earlier patent granted to Z. The Office Action was dated September 15, 1998 and set a three month shortened statutory period for reply. P's unsigned reply, filed February 3, 1999, did not include a petition for an extension of time and contained only the following paragraph: Applicant respectfully spits on the ludicrous position taken by the Examiner in rejecting all claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) based on an invalid patent granted to Z. Applicant may be willing to overlook the Examiner's stupidity in making this rejection since it is possible that the Examiner was unaware that Z is a bum and a thief who stole Applicant's invention. Applicant has renumbered the claims and has attached a copy of Z's patent with notations made thereon. Applicant respectfully requests that the Examiner "WAKE UP" and take another look at Applicant's claims in light of these remarks. Please charge my deposit account number 99-1234 to cover the cost of any required fees. P should not be surprised when the amendment is not entered because: