Appeal No. 2003-0867 Page 13
Application No. 09/688,104
combination of prior art disclosures. See In re Merck & Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097,
231 USPQ 375, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1
and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Claims 2, 4 to 13 and 15 to 19
As set forth above, dependent claims 2 and 4 to 13 have been grouped together
with claim 1 by the appellants. Accordingly, these claims will be treated as falling with
claim 1. Likewise, dependent claims 15 to 19 have been grouped together with claim
14 by the appellants. Accordingly, these claims will be treated as falling with claim 14.
See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re
Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987); and In re Wood,
582 F.2d 638, 642, 199 USPQ 137, 140 (CCPA 1978). Thus, it follows that the
decision of the examiner to reject claims 2, 4 to 13 and 15 to 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
is also affirmed.
Claim 20
We will not sustain the rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007