Appeal No. 2003-1489
Application No. 09/256,486
Appealed claims 1-6, 8-15, 17-20, 22, 23, 28, 29, 31, 33 and
40-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Gavin in view of Van Deusen. Claim 7 also stands rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Gavin in view of
Van Deusen and O'Bryan.
In accordance with the grouping of claims set forth at
page 8 of appellant's principal brief, the following groups of
claims stand or fall together:
(A) claims 1-10, 12-15, 22, 23, 28 and 29;
(B) claim 11;
(C) claim 31;
(D) claim 33; and
(E) claims 17-20 and 40-44.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejections for essentially those reasons
expressed in the Answer, and we add the following primarily for
emphasis.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007