Appeal No. 2006-2057
Application No. 10/277,482
Claims 1-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Awada ('643) in view of Awada ('550), de Keller and Ornstein.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner
and the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the
answer (mailed February 22, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (filed December 6, 2004) for the
appellant's arguments thereagainst.
Only those arguments actually made by appellant have been considered in
this decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but chose not to make
in the brief have not been considered. See 37 C.F.R. § 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, appellant's arguments set forth in the brief along with the examiner's
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the
examiner's answer.
Upon consideration of the record before us, we make the determinations
which follow. We begin with the rejection of claims 1-30 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Awada ('643) in view of Ornstein.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013