Appeal No. 2001-1344
Application No. 09/218,763
of the instant disclosure with respect to the invention set forth
in the appealed claims. While some experimentation by artisans may
be necessary in order to practice the invention, we find that such
experimentation would not be undue. Accordingly, we will not
sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11, 13-19, and 21-24
under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
In summary, we have not sustained the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, rejection of claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11, 13-19,
and 21-24. With respect to the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph rejection of claims 11 and 19, we have not sustained the
rejection of claim 11, but have sustained the rejection of claim
19. Therefore, the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 2, 4-9,
11, 13-19, and 21-24 is affirmed-in-part.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007