Appeal No. 2005-2470
Application No. 10/115,068
unpatentable over Lerman in view of Korobow. Claim 10 stands
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Lerman in view of Nix.
Appellant submits at page 5 of the principal brief that
"[t]he groupings of Claims 1-2, of Claims 3-7, of Claims 8-10,
and of Claims 11-16 are each submitted to stand separately"
(paragraph 4). However, the Argument section of appellant's
Brief sets forth separate substantive arguments only for claims
7, 3 and 5 (see page 7 of principal brief, last paragraph).
Since appellant groups claims 3-7 together, the examiner's § 103
rejection of claims 3, 5 and 7 over Lerman in view of Korobow
stands or falls together with claim 3, upon which claims 5 and 7
depend. Also, the examiner's § 102 rejection of claims 1, 2, 4,
6, 8 and 9 stands or falls together with claim 1.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we find that the examiner's
rejections are well-founded. Accordingly, we will sustain the
examiner's rejections.
We consider first the examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 over Lerman. Although appellant's stated intended purpose
for the claimed sleeve is to provide support for an infant's head
during breast and bottle feeding, and Lerman's sleeve provides
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007