Appeal No. 2004-1508
Application No. 09/443,559 Page 6
regard, we note that appellant has not even specifically
addressed the examiner’s obviousness position as clearly laid out
on this record, much less convinced us of any error therein. It
follows that we will affirm the examiner’s § 103(a) rejection
over James.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-11 and 33-37
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Heim is
reversed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-11 and
33-37 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over James
is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007