Appeal No. 2005-0929 Application No. 09/852,519 We note that the appellant argues claims 5-7 and 8 separately. See, the Brief, pp. 4-6. However, given our disposition of the case with respect to claim 1, we need not address these issues. In view of the foregoing, Rejection II is reversed. REVERSED JOAN ELLIS ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT ) ERIC GRIMES ) APPEALS AND Administrative Patent Judge ) ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) NEAL ADAMS ) Administrative Patent Judge ) JE/dpv 9Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007