Appeal No. 2006-2064
Application 09/771,761
evidence of obviousness, the Examiner offers Curtis in view of Taylor with
respect to claims 2-4, 14, 15, 17, 23, 24, and 29-31, and Curtis in view of
Kruger with respect to claims 5-7, 19, 20, 27, and 28.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner,
reference is made to the Briefs1 and Answer for their respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the
rejections advanced by the Examiner, the arguments in support of the
rejections, and the evidence of anticipation and 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 Examiner’s rationale in support of the
rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
1 The Appeal Brief was filed February 22, 2005. In response to the Examiner’s
Answer mailed April 25, 2005, a Reply Brief was filed June 27, 2005 which was
acknowledged and entered by the Examiner as indicated in the communication mailed
April 3, 2006.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007