Appeal No. 1998-2375
Application 08/512,065
asserted by appellants in the principal brief. The responsive arguments portion of the
answer beginning at page 4 does not address these arguments of patentability of these
respective dependent claims. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of them.
In summary, we have sustained the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1
through 3, 5 through 13, 15, 17 through 24, 26 through 42, 45 through 54 and 56 through 58
because the particulars of these claims have not been argued by appellants. On the other
hand, we do agree with appellants' view that claims 4, 25, 43, 44 and 55 would not have
been obvious to the artisan within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. Therefore, the decision
of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007