Appeal 2007-0691
Application 10/465,423
1
2 B. Record on appeal
3 In deciding this appeal, we have considered only the following
4 documents:
5 1. Specification, including original claims, as published in U.S.
6 Published Application 2004/00338835 A1 (26 February 2004)
7 2. Final Rejection entered 06 December 2005
8 3. The Appeal Brief filed 08 June 2006
9 4. Chasan declaration filed 08 June 2006
10 5. The Examiner’s Answer entered 17 August 2006
11 6. Phillips
12 7. Chasan
13 8. Reyes-Gavilan
14 9. Chasan declaration filed 08 June 2006
15 10. PTO bibliographic data sheet for the application on appeal
16 11. Claims on appeal as reproduced in the Appeal Brief
17
18 C. Issues
19 There are several issues.
20 A first issue is the scope of the claims on appeal.
21 A second issue is whether Ciba has shown that the Examiner erred in
22 rejecting the claims on appeal as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
23 § 103(a) over the prior art.
24 Related to the second issue, is whether Ciba has supplied a clear and
25 convincing showing of unexpected results.
26
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013