Appeal No. 2006-1728 Παγε 3 Application No. 10/337,417 Claims 1-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. � 103(a) as being unpatentable over Schutt in view of Faithful, Michaels (‘854) and Michaels (‘002). Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer (supplemental answer mailed December 20, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the brief (filed October 21, 2005) and reply brief (also filed October 21, 2005) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst. 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 brief have not been considered. 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 rejection advanced by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, appellants' arguments set forth in the briefs along with thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007