Appeal No. 2005-0211 3
Application No. 10/264,717
5. Claims 5-6 and 19-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from
Natiw in view of Holt.
6. Claims 13 and 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from Natiw in
view of Oswald and Van Meter.1
7. Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from Sisler in view of
Maiden-Nesset.
8. Claim 17 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from Sisler.
9. Claims 21-22 and 25-26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from
Natiw in view of Price.
10. Claim 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from Natiw in view
of Maiden-Nesset.
11. Claim 27 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious from Sisler in view
of Holt, Maiden-Nesset and Van Meter.
We have carefully considered the entire record in light of the opposing positions
taken by the appellant and by the examiner. Having done so, we shall affirm all of the
rejections at issue. The basis for our decision is as follows:
1 We note that this rejection is not listed in the “Grounds of Rejection” section of the examiner’s
answer, but is discussed on pages 10 and 11 of the answer.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007