Appeal No. 2003-1653
Application No. 09/828,102
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claim 32, and dependent claims
33 and 34, as being unpatentable over Schrum in view of Allard.
Finally, the examiner observes that the foregoing
limitations in independent claims 19, 25 and 32 which find no
response in the applied references lack written descriptive
support in the specification (see page 8 in the answer). While
this observation is well taken for the reasons discussed above in
connection with the 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, rejection,
it has no bearing on the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections since such
limitations must be considered and given weight in evaluating the
obviousness of the claimed subject matter (see MPEP § 2143.03 and
the cases cited therein).
SUMMARY
Since at least one rejection of claims 19 through 34 is
sustained, the decision of the examiner to reject these claims is
affirmed.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007