Appeal No. 2006-1466
Application No. 10/230,838
the wafer support (outlet 33')(see Noda, col. 10, ll. 10-38).
In view of our claim construction as discussed above, we agree with the
examiner that the claim elements as required by claim 1 on appeal have been described
by Noda within the meaning of _ 102. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s rejection of
claim 1 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Noda. Claims 9 and 12 have not been
separately argued by appellant, and thus fall with claim 1 (Brief, page 7).
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal
may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv)(2004).
AFFIRMED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN ) Administrative
Patent Judge )
)
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
) )
CATHERINE TIMM )
Administrative Patent Judge )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007