Appeal No. 2006-2354 Page 3
Application No. 09/877,157
The appellants seek our review of the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-24
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Moriconi in view of
Abraham.
Rather than reiterate in detail the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the
examiner and the appellants regarding this appeal, we make reference to the
examiner's answer (mailed February 3, 2006) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection and to the appellants’ brief (filed January 31,
2005) and reply brief (filed March 31, 2006) for the appellants’ arguments.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully considered the
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied prior art, and the respective
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we affirm the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-24 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a).
Only those arguments actually made by the appellants have been considered
in this decision. Arguments that the appellants could have made but chose not to
make in the brief have not been considered. We deem such arguments to be
waived by the appellants. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (effective September
13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg. 49959 (August 12, 2004), 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21
(September 7, 2004)).
Claims 1, 12, and 24
The appellants argue claims 1, 12, and 24 as a group. As such, we treat
claim 1 as the representative claim. In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a),
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007