Appeal No. 1998-0023
Application 08/470,374
i.e., so that the mixer (1b) of Miyata has six sets of such
“mixer elements” disposed along the longitudinal axis thereof.
Thus, we do not see that this limitation in claim 17 in any
way distinguishes over the mixing device and method of Miyata.
Given that appellants’ arguments for the patentability of
claim 17 on appeal are unpersuasive, we will sustain the
examiner’s rejection of that claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Regarding claims 18, 19 and 20 which depend from claim 17, we
note that appellants have grouped these claims along with
claim 17 (brief, page 4). As a result of their grouping with
claim 17, we view claims 18 through 20 as falling with the
independent claim and will therefore also sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claims 18 through 20 under 35 U.S.C. §
103.
The only other rejection for our review on appeal is that
of claims 21 through 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007