Appeal No. 2002-1470 Page 3
Application No. 09/490,192
July 3, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of
the rejection, and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 9, filed June
11, 2001) for appellant's arguments thereagainst. Only those
arguments actually made by appellant have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but chose
not to make in the brief have not been considered. See 37 CFR
1.192(a).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of anticipation relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejection. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
appellant's arguments set forth in the brief along with the
examiner's rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner's answer.
Upon consideration of the record before us, we affirm,
essentially for the reasons set forth by the examiner, and add
the following comments. We note at the outset that appellant
asserts (brief, pages 3 and 4) that "[c]laims 1-9, 15-19, 21-25,
27-32, and 34-39 stand or fall together." Consistent with this
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007