Appeal Number: 2006-3172
Application Number: 10/420,685
In addition, we make the following prior art of record:
Cottingham, Excel 2000 Developer’s Handbook, ISBN 0-7821-2328-7,
pp. 524-533 (1999).
REJECTIONS
Claims 1-7 and 11-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over
Wills and Hodgson.
Claims 8, 9, 21 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over
Wills, Hodgson and Theisen.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the
examiner's answer (mailed March 3, 2006) for the reasoning in support of the
rejection, and to appellant’s brief (filed February 1, 2006) and reply brief (filed
April 26, 2006) for the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant’s specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to
the respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations that follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013