Appeal No. 2006-1546
Application No. 09/974,262
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advocated by
the Appellants and by the Examiner concerning these rejections,
we refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer
respectively for a complete exposition thereof.
OPINION
For the reasons provided below, the 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph rejection and the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection are
sustained.
Regarding the § 103(a) rejection, Appellants indicate in
their brief that all the claims are argued separately. However,
as the Examiner indicates in his answer, only claims 2, 10, 19
and 20 are argued separately. Appellants do not challenge the
Examiner’s claim grouping in their reply brief. Accordingly, we
agree with the Examiner’s grouping of the claims. The groupings
of the claims for this appeal are as follows:
1. Claims 1, 5-9, 11-12 and 18 stand or fall with claim 1,
2. Claims 2 and 10 are a separate grouping,
3. Claims 19 and 20 are a separate grouping.
We generally affirm for the reasons provided by the
Examiner in his answer. (Answer, pages 4-6). We provide the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007