Appeal No. 2005-0806 Page 12
Application No. 10/179,812
of April 25, 2002 in Application No. 09/121,628 and June 24, 2004 in Application No.
08/815,556.9 As to the September 17, 2001 Board decision in parent Application No.
08/815,556, we note that the issue in that appeal was whether or not the claims under
appeal would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of
ordinary skill in the art from the teachings of Nesbitt and U.S. Patent No. 5,068,151 to
Nakamura. Thus, the issues in this appeal are different than the issue decided in that
appeal.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 9
and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Nesbitt in view of Horiuchi is
affirmed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 2 to 5 and 11 to 13 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is also affirmed since the appellant has not challenged the rejection of
these dependent claims with any reasonable specificity, thereby allowing claims 2 to 5
and 11 to 13 to fall with claims 1, 9 and 10 (see In re Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2
USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987)).
9 Our decision herein is also in harmony with our decision rendered in Application No. 10/047,626.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007