Appeal No. 2006-1179 Παγε 4
Application No. 10/242,532
rejections, and to the brief (filed August 17, 2005) and reply
brief (filed January 9, 2006) 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 indefiniteness, anticipation
and 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 briefs along with the examiner's rationale in
support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in
the examiner's answer.
Upon consideration of the record before us, we make the
determinations which follow. We begin with the rejection of
claims 41-57 and 62 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph as
being indefinite.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007