Appeal 2007-0727
Application 09/951,711
dependent claims, those claims stand or fall with the representative
independent claim. See In re Young, 927 F.2d at 590, 18 USPQ2d at 1091
(Fed. Cir. 1991). Therefore, we will sustain the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 3, 11, 19, and 27 as being unpatentable over Kralowetz in view of
Puranik, claims 4, 12, 20, and 28 as being unpatentable over Kralowetz in
view of Wookey, and claims 5, 13, 21, and 29 as being unpatentable over
Kralowetz in view of Schloss for the same reasons discussed supra with
respect to independent claims 1, 9, 17 and 25.
In summary, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 6-9,
14-17, 22-25 and 30-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). We also sustain the
Examiner’s rejections of claims 3-5, 11-13, 19-21 and 27-29 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The rejections of these claims encompass all claims on
appeal, and all rejections are affirmed. Therefore, the decision of the
Examiner is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013