Appeal No. 2006-2210
Application 09/944,230
Lastly, the separate rejection of dependent claim 4 within 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is also sustained. Appellants’ brief remarks at the bottom of page 15
of the principal brief on appeal does not argue that Dennison is not properly
combinable within 35 U.S.C. § 103 with Kikuchi and does not dispute the
features argued by the examiner as taught in Dennison. Moreover,
appellants’ specification page 12 in paragraph [0040] relies upon the
teachings in Dennison as the starting point of appellants’ own disclosed
invention.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner rejecting
various claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 is sustained.
Therefore, the decision of the examiner is affirmed.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007