Appeal No. 2006-0264
Application No. 10/217,064
results, which would serve to rebut the inference of obviousness
established by the applied prior art.
In conclusion, the examiner's § 112, second paragraph
rejection is reversed. Based on the foregoing and the reasons
well-stated by the examiner, the examiner's § 103 rejections are
sustained. Consequently, 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 )
)
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007