Appeal No. 2003-0124
Application No. 09/487,832
Claims 23-45 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 251.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or Examiner,
we make reference to the briefs1 and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner's rejections and the arguments of Appellants
and the Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we reverse the
rejection of claims 42-45 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,
the Examiner's rejection of claims 23-30 and 32-45 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, the Examiner's rejection of
claims 23 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and the Examiner's
rejection of claims 23-45 under 35 U.S.C. § 251. In addition,
for the reasons stated infra, we affirm the rejection of claim 31
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
We first will address the rejection of claims 42-45 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
As noted by our reviewing court in Enzo v. Calgene, 188 F.3d
1362, 1371, 52 USPQ2d 1129, 1135 "[t]he statutory basis for the
1 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on January 29, 2002.
Appellants filed a Reply Brief on May 15, 2002. The Examiner
mailed an Office communication on May 30, 2002, stating that the
Reply Brief had been entered.
44
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007