Appeal No. 2005-0822
Application No. 09/825,612
relevant, let alone sufficient to rebut the examiner’s prima
facie case of anticipation.
For these reasons and those set forth in the answer, we
affirm the examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) of: (i)
appealed claims 13 through 15, 22 through 26, and 28 as
anticipated by Chang; and (ii) appealed claims 16 through 18 as
anticipated by Chang, as evidenced by Muller.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
Romulo H. Delmendo )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)) BOARD OF
PATENT
Jeffrey T. Smith )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)) INTERFERENCES
)
Beverly A. Pawlikowski )
Administrative Patent Judge )
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007