Appeal No. 2004-2053
Application 09/773,704
system of Bonnefoy and the EP’209 publication as taught by
Singh. . . .”
The appellants also appear to rely on the same arguments
applicable to claim 1 above to establish patentability. See,
e.g., the Brief, pages 21-22. Thus, for the same reasons set
forth above, we are not convinced by the appellants’ arguments.
Thus, after due consideration of all of the evidence and
arguments proffered by both the examiner and the appellants, we
determine that the preponderance of evidence weighs in favor of
unpatentability of the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we
affirm the examiner’s decision rejecting all of the appealed
claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(b) and 103(a).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007