Appeal No. 2005-0346
Application. 09/897,891
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejections and the arguments of the
Appellants and the Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-10 and 21-34 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103.
Only those arguments actually made by Appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments that Appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the brief have not been
considered. We deem such arguments to be waived by Appellants
[see 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) effective September 13, 2004
replacing 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
For purposes of our decision we will treat claim 1 as a
representative claim of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102; and
claim 4 as a representative claim of the rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
I. Whether the Rejection of Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10, 21-23,
25-28, and 30-34 Under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the disclosure of Lach does not fully meet the invention as
recited in claims 1-3, 5-8, 10, 21-23, 25-28, and 30-34.
Accordingly, we reverse.
44
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007