Appeal No. 2005-0287 Page 10
Application No. 09/216,214
§ 103 (a) Rejection
The examiner relies on the combined teachings of Arai and
Watabe as evidence of obviousness in rejecting the claimed
subject matter.2
We note that appellant (brief, page 3) maintains that the
rejected claims do not stand or fall together for reasons set
forth in the arguments. Accordingly, we consider the rejected
claims separately to the extent that separate arguments have been
presented in the briefs consistent with 37 CFR § 1.192 (c)(7) and
(8), as in effect at the time of filing of the appeal briefs.
2 In the supplemental answer (page 9), the examiner states
that reliance on Tada (Japan Kokai 4-42938), a reference referred
to in the obviousness rejection set forth in an earlier answer,
has been withdrawn. Accordingly, we do not consider that
reference as part of the evidence relied upon by the examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims in the rejection before us.
However, in the event of further prosecution of this subject
matter before the examiner, the examiner and appellant should
make of record a complete English language translation of Tada
and the examiner should determine the patentability of the claims
thereagainst.
Also, we are aware of appellant’s concern regarding a
perceived new ground of rejection. However, the record does not
reflect that appellant sought any review of that perceived
procedural transgression via the appropriate avenue of relief;
that is, by way of petition to the appropriate examining
supervisory authority.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007