Appeal No. 2005-2529
Application No. 10/154,140
As a final point, we note that appellants base no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is reversed,
whereas the examiner's rejection of all the appealed claims under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is sustained. Accordingly, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (effective Sep. 13, 2004; 69 Fed. Reg. 49960
(Aug. 12, 2004); 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (Sep. 7, 2004)).
AFFIRMED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
JEFFREY T. SMITH ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
BEVERLY PAWLIKOWSKI )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007