Appeal No. 2006-2205 Page 3
Application No. 10/699,956
Claims 43, 44, 48, 52, 53, 56, 64 and 66-71 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being unpatentable over Shamshoum.
Claims 45-47, 49-51, 54, 55, 57-63 and 65 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shamshoum.
We refer to the briefs and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by appellants and
the examiner concerning the issues before us on this appeal.
OPINION
Having carefully considered each of appellants* arguments
as set forth in the brief and reply brief, appellants have not
persuaded us of reversible error on the part of the examiner.
Accordingly, we will affirm the examiner’s rejections for 2
substantially the reasons set forth by the examiner in the
answer. We add the following for emphasis.
2We note that a separate rejection of claim 54 under the
second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as set forth in the final
action is not before us for review. The examiner vacated
(withdrew) that rejection as set forth in Item No. 3 at page 2 of
the answer. As another matter, we note that the cover page and
second sheet (first page number 2) of the final office action as
captured in the electronic file record of this application
apparently relates to another application. Correction of the
file record is required prior to final disposition of this
application in the Technology Center.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007