Appeal No. 2006-1328
Application No. 10/379,307
As a final point, with respect to the Section 103 rejection,
we note that appellant bases no argument upon objective evidence
of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, and for the reasons
well-stated by the examiner, 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).
AFFIRMED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHUNG K. PAK ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:hh
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007