Appeal No. 2006-0349 Page 6 Application No. 10/293,727 CONCLUSION To summarize, the rejections of claims 1, 10-13, 21 and 22 as being unpatentable over Amir in view of Hanna and claims 2-4, 18-20 and 24-26 as being unpatentable over Amir in view of Hanna and Hay are sustained. The rejection of claims 5, 14 and 23 as being unpatentable over Amir in view of Hanna and Brasz is not sustained. The examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED-IN-PART TERRY J. OWENS ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) JENNIFER D. BAHR ) Administrative Patent Judge )Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007