Appeal No. 2004-0275
Application No. 09/09/318,186
Claims 60 and 77 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Welch, Liu, and Weingarten, in view of Lam.
Claims 60-65, 67-69, 71 and 74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Welch, Liu, and Weingarten in view of Pirkle.
We affirm these rejections.
Claim Grouping
According to appellants, the claims stand or fall together. Appeal Brief,
page 5. Since the individual claims are not argued, we decide this appeal with
respect to the prior art rejection on the basis of claim 60. 37 CRF § 1.192(c)(7)
(1998). In re McDaniel, 293 F.3d 1379, 63 USPQ2d 1462, 1466 (Fed. Cir.
2002).
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given consideration to
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied references, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations that follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007