Appeal No. 2006-2225
Application No. 09/815,439
The following rejections are on appeal before us:
1. Claims 1-6 and 24-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Herz in view of Kiger.
2. Claims 7, 9-20, 28, and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Herz in view of Kiger and further in view of Bodnar.
3. Claims 8 and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Herz in view of Kiger and further in view of Bates.
4. Claims 21-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Herz in view of Kiger, Bodnar, and further in view of Raman.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant 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 rejections advanced
by the examiner and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching
our decision, the appellant's 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
answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the evidence relied upon
and the level of skill in the particular art would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007