Appeal No. 2006-0259
Application No. 09/220,462
Claims 18-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Yoshinobu in view of Aulanko and further
in view of Tracey.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (mailed November 19,
2003) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (filed August 18, 2003) for the
appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
Only those arguments actually made by appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the brief have not been
considered. See 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(eff. Sept. 13, 2004).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
appellants' arguments set forth in the brief along with the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007