Ex Parte Brescia - Page 3


                Appeal No. 2006-2418                                                                                                            
                Application No. 09/973,412                                                                                                      




                         The following rejections are on appeal before us:1                                                                     

                         1.  Claims 39-43, 46-51, and 54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                                             

                being unpatentable over Owensby in view of Heddaya.                                                                             

                         2.  Claims 44, 45, 52, and 53 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                                         

                unpatentable over Owensby in view of Heddaya and further in view of Guedalia.                                                   

                         Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the examiner, we make                                                 

                reference to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.                                                      
















                                                                                                                                               
                1                                                                                                                               
                1 Appellant's statement of the grounds of rejection to be reviewed on appeal includes a rejection of claims                     
                39 and 47 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph [brief, page 2].  The examiner, however, did not                              
                include the rejection in the answer notwithstanding indicating that appellant's statement of the grounds of                     
                rejection in the brief was correct [see answer, page 4].  See also reply brief, page 2 (acknowledging the                       
                examiner's failure to address the rejection).  Since the examiner did not address this rejection in the                         
                answer, we presume that the examiner withdrew this rejection.                                                                   











                                                                       3                                                                        



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007