Appeal 2007-1234
Application 10/017,990
those claims stand or fall with the representative independent claim. See
In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
See also 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004). Therefore, we will sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claim 2, 4-6, 8, 13, 15, 17, 21-24, 27, 29, and 30 as
being anticipated by Husher for the same reasons discussed supra with
respect to independent claim 1. For the same reasons, we will sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 3, 7, 10, 14, 25, 26, and 28 as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Husher in view of Taniguchi as
well as the Examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 9, 11, 12, 16, and
18-20 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Husher in view of Sze.
DECISION
We have sustained the Examiner’s rejection of all claims on appeal.
Therefore, the decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1-30 is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013