{ "items" : [
    { "id" : "http://webisa.webdatacommons.org/305792509"
      "properties" : {
        "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type" : [ "http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#Entity" ] ,
        "http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value" : [ "The appellant, taking into account the objective content of the communication and the Notice, could therefore reasonably consider that(a) all issues pending before the department of first instance were resolved,(b) the document was an act that was binding on him and on the Examining Division,(c) a reasoned choice between legally viable alternatives had been made,(d) the substantive procedural situ" ] ,
        "http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasQuotedFrom" : [ "epo.org" ] } },

    { "id" : "http://webisa.webdatacommons.org/prov/349750508"
      "properties" : {
        "http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasDerivedFrom" : [ "http://webisa.webdatacommons.org/305792509"] } } }
