Appeal No. 2005-0323 Page 3
Application No. 09/577,835
Claims 25-27 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Gardner in view of Mogami.
Claims 28 and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Gardner in view of Mogami and Bai.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 28, mailed
March 9, 2004) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
of the rejections, and to appellants' brief (Paper No. 26, filed
November 17, 2003) and reply brief (Paper No. 29, filed May 10,
2004) for appellants' arguments thereagainst. Only those
arguments actually made by appellants have been considered in
this decision. Arguments which appellants could have made but
chose not to make in the brief have not been considered. See 37
CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007