Appeal No. 2006-0629 Παγε 3
Application No. 10/668,021
Claims 1-9, 19 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102
(a) or (e) as being anticipated by Lin.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (mailed August 29,
2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (filed July 17, 2005) and reply
brief (filed October 31, 2005) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
Only those arguments actually made by appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the brief have not been
considered. See 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(eff. Sept. 13, 2004).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
appellants' arguments set forth in the briefs along with the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007