Appeal No. 2005-1169 Page 11
Application No. 09/900,063
rejection of claims 1-3, 8-11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 26 and 36-38 above, we decline to
reach the merits of the enablement rejection as to those claims.
CONCLUSION
The written description rejection as to claims 1-3, 8-11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 26
and 36-38 is affirmed, but is reversed as to claims 27-29, 54 and 55. With
respect to the enablement rejection, it is reversed with respect to claims 27-29,
54 and 55, but because the written description rejection as to claims 1-3, 8-11,
16, 17, 19, 20, 26 and 36-38 was affirmed, we decline to reach the merits of the
enablement rejection as to those claims.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART; REVERSED-IN-PART
Toni R. Scheiner )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Lora M. Green )
Administrative Patent Judge )
LMG/jlb
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007