Appeal No. 2006-1658
Application No. 09/801,617
B. Claims 14 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
the combination of Weiss and Tracy.
Rather than reiterating the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, the opinion
refers to respective details in the Briefs1 and the Examiner’s Answer.2 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 taken into consideration. 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 Examiner’s rejections, the arguments in support of the rejections
and the evidence of anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support
for the rejections. We have likewise reviewed and taken into consideration Appellants’
arguments set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in support of the
rejections and arguments in the rebuttal set forth in the Examiner’s Answer. We note that
the Examiner has relied upon the Weiss reference (filed on February 22, 2001) to reject
Appellants’ claimed invention (filed on March 08, 2001) under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103.
In response to the Examiner’s rejections, Appellants rely on the declarations and exhibits
filed September 8, 2004, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.131 to antedate the February 22, 2001
filing date of the Weiss reference. The Examiner, in response, has found that Appellants’
1 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief March 31, 2005. Appellants filed a Reply Brief on August 01, 2005.
2 The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on May 31, 2005. The Examiner mailed an office
communication October 03, 2005, stating that the Reply Brief has been entered and considered.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007