Appeal No. 2006-1951 Παγε 3
Application No. 10/392,140
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Wenning in view of Just.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (mailed September 1,
2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (filed June 16, 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 rejections advanced
by the examiner, 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, in
reaching our decision, appellants' arguments set forth in the
briefs along with the examiner's rationale in support of the
rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner's
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007