Appeal No. 2004-0348
Application No. 09/901,220
As a final point, we note that appellants base no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
rejections of claims 54-56 and 59-64 are sustained, whereas the
examiner's rejection of claim 65 is reversed. Accordingly,
the examiner's decision rejecting the appealed claims is
affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
ROMULO H. DELMENDO ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
BEVERLY PAWLIKOWSKI )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007