Appeal No. 95-3273
Application 08/136,856
away from using such a frame). The rejection of claim 3 under
§ 103 as unpatentable over Rokurota is therefore affirmed.
The rejection of claims 4-11 under § 103 as
unpatentable over Rokurota is also affirmed, because those claims
were not separately argued. Nielson, 816 F.2d at 1572, 2 USPQ2d
at 1528.
In summary, the rejection of claim 1 under 35 § U.S.C.
102(b) as anticipated by Geil is affirmed, as are the rejection
of claims 1 and 2 under § 102(b) as anticipated by Rokurota and
the rejection of claims 3-11 under § 103 as unpatentable over
Rokurota.
-11-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007