Appeal No. 2005-1164 Page 13
Application No. 09/721,131
As a result, we are left with no evidence on this record to rebut the
examiner’s finding that NaCl, with or without potassium, will function as required
by the claimed method. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of claim 28 under 35
U.S.C. § 101 and 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Claim 35:
Having disposed of all claims on appeal, we do not reach the merits of the
separate rejection of claim 35 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
)
William F. Smith )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
)
Donald E. Adams ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge )
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007