Appeal No. 2005-0961
Application No. 09/990,787
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a complete
discussion of the viewpoints expressed by the appellants and by
the examiner concerning these rejections.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth in the answer and below, these
rejections will be sustained.
On the record of this appeal, the appellants have chosen to
not contest the examiner’s section 112, second paragraph,
rejection of claims 11 and 12. See pages 4 and 8 of the brief.
Therefore, we hereby summarily sustain this rejection.
As for the section 102 rejection, it is paramount to bear in
mind that a reference will anticipate if it expressly or
inherently discloses every limitation recited in the claims even
though it does not address the intended use of the claimed
structure. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d
1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Further, in our consideration of
this rejection, it is important to recognize that, during
examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. In
1(...continued)
1 and 13 which are representative of the aforementioned claim
groupings.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007