Appeal No. 2006-0531
Application No. 09/932,070
claim 1 on appeal. Additionally, we observe that as to the
product claim 13, the teaching beginning at column 22, line 51 to
the end of the patent of Cluts clearly contemplates this feature.
Lastly, because page 18 of the brief does not distinguish
features of the dependent claims in the second stated rejection
and because patentability is urged only on the bases of
dependency from independent claim 1 on appeal, dependent claims 6
through 8 fall with our consideration of their parent independent
claim 1. Additionally, no other arguments are presented as to
any other dependent claims on appeal for our consideration in
this appeal.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner
rejecting all claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007