Appeal No. 1998-0357
Application 08/258,429
taken with or without Arnold.
Finally, given the appellants’ concession that the
subject matter recited in claim 1 would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the teachings of
the applied references, it is not apparent, nor have the
appellants’ cogently explained (see pages 32 and 33 in the
brief), why the subject matter recited in claim 55 would not
have been similarly obvious. Therefore, we shall sustain the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) rejection of claim 55 as being
unpatentable over Newhouse in view of Grund, taken with or
without Arnold.
In summary, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1, 3, 4, 6 through 21, 24 through 31 and 33 through 55 is
affirmed with respect to claims 1, 3, 8, 12, 13, 31, 33
through 40, 47 through 52 and 55, and reversed with respect to
claims 4, 6, 7, 9 through 11, 14 through 21, 24 through 30, 41
through 46, 53 and 54.
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007