Appeal No. 2005-2111 16
Application No. 09/827,454
showing as to why the combination of Pepper and Vasil’ev would be improper. We only
know that, in the instant case, when confronted with this combination of references anent
claims 42-44, appellant made no specific arguments to convince us of the impropriety of
such a combination.
Accordingly, since we have sustained the rejection of claims 42-44 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 but we have not sustained the rejection of claims 1-41 and 45-49 under
35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007