Appeal No. 2006-0837
Application No. 10/081,446
Rejections At Issue
Claims 16-23, 26-33, and 36-43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over the combination of Burrows and Ben-Natan.
Claims 24-25, 34-35, and 44-45 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over the combination of Burrows, Ben-Natan, and Mueller.
Throughout our opinion, we make references to the Appellants’ briefs, and to the
Examiner’s Answer for the respective details thereof.1
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on appeal, the Examiner’s
rejections and the arguments of the Appellants and the Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
affirm the Examiner’s rejection of claims 16-45 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
I. Whether the Rejection of Claims 16-23 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the evidence relied upon
and the level of skill in the particular art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art
the invention as set forth in claims 16-23. Accordingly, we affirm.
1 Appellants filed an appeal brief on August 5, 2005. Appellants filed a reply brief on October
24, 2005. The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on August 23, 2005.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007