Appeal No. 2004-0657
Application No. 09/845,604
As indicated by the Appellant on page 3 of the brief, the
appealed claims are grouped separately from one another.
Therefore, in assessing the merits of the rejections before us,
we will consider each claim individually to the extent that the
subject matter recited therein has been separately argued. See
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(8)(2002). Also see Ex parte Schier, 21 USPQ2d
1016, 1018 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1991).
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for
a complete discussion of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the
Appellant and by the Examiner concerning the above noted
rejections.
OPINION
For the reasons which follow, we will sustain the Examiner’s
§ 102 rejection of claims 1-3 and 5 as well as the § 103 rejection
of claims 4 and 6. However, the § 102 rejection of claims 7-11,
13, 14 and 16 as well as the § 103 rejection of claims 12 and 15
cannot be sustained.
Our assessment of the rejections before us begins with the
well established legal proposition that, during examination
proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification. In re Hyatt,
33
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007