Appeal No. 2005-2330
Application No. 10/026,123
2. Claims 4, 8 and 15 through 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Schmitz,
Widlund and Fletcher;
3. Claims 6 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Schmitz, Widlund and Roessler;
and
4. Claims 9, 10 and 21 through 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Schmitz,
Widlund and Johansson.
DISCUSSION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and
prior art, including all of the evidence and arguments advanced
by both the examiner and the appellants’ in support of their
respective positions. This review has led us to conclude that
the examiner’s Section 103 rejections are well founded.
Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s Section 103 rejections for
essentially the factual findings and conclusions set forth in the
Answer and below.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007