Appeal No. 2002-0584
Application 08/321,028
teachings of Weisman and Takeuchi as applied above, would have
suggested this subject matter.
Hence, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of claim 21 as being unpatentable over Weisman in view
of Takeuchi.
XI. Claims 3, 4, 6, 9, 14, 18 through 20, 22 and 26 through 29
Finally, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of dependent claims 3, 4, 6, 9, 14, 18 through 20, 22
and 26 through 29 as being unpatentable over Weisman in view of
Takeuchi since the appellant has not challenged such with any
reasonable specificity, thereby allowing these claims to stand or
fall with independent claims 1, 11 and 12 from which they
variously depend (see In re Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2
USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987)).
SUMMARY
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 through 29
is affirmed with respect to claims 1, 3 through 9, 11, 12 and 14
through 29, and reversed with respect to claims 2, 10 and 13.
15
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007