Appeal 2007-3048
Application 10/355,018
III. REJECTIONS
The Examiner has rejected the claims on appeal as follows:
1) Claims 1 through 6, 14 through 18, 20, 22, and 25 through 28 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Boire
and Macquart;
2) Claims 7 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Boire, Macquart and Niwa;
3) Claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Boire, Macquart, and Wolfe;
4) Claims 10 through 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Boire, Macquart and Hartig;
5) Claims 23, 25, and 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Boire, Macquart, Sol, Baldwin, and Neuman;
6) Claims 1 through 6, 14 through 18, 20, 22, and 25 through 28 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Boire,
Noethe, and Macquart;
7) Claims 7 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Boire, Noethe, Macquart, and Niwa; and
8) Claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Boire, Noethe, Macquart, and Wolfe.
IV. FACTUAL FINDINGS, ANALYSES, AND PRINCIPLES OF LAW
Having carefully evaluated the claims, specification, and prior art
references, including the arguments advanced by both the Appellants and the
Examiner in support of their respective positions, we determine that the
Examiner’s § 103 rejections are well founded. Accordingly, we will sustain
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013