Laws are supposed to be definitive....not administered as casual interpretations...as in "We remain persuaded that, based on the evidence presented, Petitioner has provided Patent Owner with copies of the documents, as required by the statute."

An "OWNER" ...in the realm of patent prosecution is definitive.

'if applicable, the designated representative of the patent owner"... in the realm of patent prosecution is definitive.

They are not interchangeable or relational in any way....

They are separate and distinct entities( its)....that's what law is supposed to distinguish.

Handal is not the entity that represents any issue, what so ever, in this matter.

doni