Appeal No. 2006-0520 Παγε 2
Application No. 10/303,385
THE PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Zdeblick et al. (Zdeblick) 6,402,785 June 11, 2002
Weber et al. (Weber) 6,533,818 Mar. 18, 2003
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 to 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as failing to
comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 14 to 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Weber in view of Zdeblick.1
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 August 11, 2005 ) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (filed October 21, 2004) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
1 The examiner’s rejection of claims 1 to 8 and 11 to 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Weber has been withdrawn (answer at page 5).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007