Appeal No. 2004-2198
Application No. 10/047,925
circumstances to rely upon more than one document within 35 U.S.C.
§ 102. From our perspective, however, the examiner’s positions would
have been better stated by combining both references within 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
Notwithstanding these considerations, the examiner’s position
basically outlined in the answer focuses upon the CACI Limited Home Page
document. To the extent a single document is necessary here to show
anticipation, we agree with the examiner’s views that this is the document
that does. The bottom of page 4 and the top of page 5 of the principal
brief on appeal considers all the claims rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102, claims 1-3 and 7-27, to comprise one group. The arguments
presented in the subsequent pages in the principal brief focus only upon
representative claim 1 as representative of all claims in this group.
Correspondingly, appellant’s second grouping of the claims lists claims 4-6,
the claims set forth in the separately stated rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
Even a brief study of the teachings at what appears to be the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007