Appeal No. 2006-1589
Application No. 10/082,912
• transmitting the data encoding the purchased calling time from the portable networking
device to an onboard system.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Kiel et al. (Kiel) US 2003/0027549 Feb. 06, 2003
(filed Jul. 30, 2001)
The following rejection is on appeal before us:
1. Claims 1-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Kiel.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make reference to the
briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced by the
examiner and the evidence of anticipation relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
the appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s rationale in support of
the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer. 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 briefs have not been considered and are deemed to
be waived. See 37 C.F.R. §41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004).
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the evidence relied upon by
the examiner does support the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-12. Accordingly, we affirm.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007