Appeal No. 2006-2433
Application 10/061,492 Deleted: 10,
103(a). The sole ground of rejection applied to independent claim 43, which
had no claims dependent thereon at that time, involved Allen in view of
Deleted: Action
Brouillette (final rejection 4-8). This ground of rejection was also applied to
independent claims 1, 13, 24 and 41, and claims 2 through 7, 10 and 11,
dependent on claim 1, claims 14 through 19 and 22, dependent on claim 13,
and claims 25 and 31 dependent on claim 24. In the remaining grounds,
Brouillette alone was applied to independent claims 24 and 41 and claim 25,
Deleted:
dependent on claim 24; Allen in view of Brouillette further in view of
Deleted:
Pollard was applied to claim 21, dependent on claim 13;Allen in view of
Deleted:
Brouillette further in view of Murthy was applied to claims 9, 20 and
Deleted:
26, dependent on claims 1, 13 and 24, respectively; Allen in view of
Brouillette further in view of Murthy and further in view of Wolf was
Deleted:
applied to claim 30, dependent on claim 24, Allen in view of Brouillette
further in view of Michaelis was applied to claims 27 through 29, dependent
on claim 24, independent claim 33 and claims 34 through 37 dependent
Deleted:
thereon; and Allen in view of Brouillette further in view of Michaelis and
further in view of Pollard was applied to claims 38 and 39, dependent on
claim 33 (id. 3-4 and 8-12).
In the amendment after the final action filed October 5, 2004,
Appellants cancelled all pending claims except independent claim 43 and
introduced new claims 46 through 48, all dependent on claim 43, without
Comment [T1]: SHOULD I
further amending claim 43 (amendment after final rejection 1-4). Appellants CAPITALIZE FIRST LETTER OF
Amendment and Final Rejection?
argued the ground of rejection based on Allen in view of Brouillette applied Deleted: , pages
Deleted: f
to the group of claims including claim 43 in the final rejection, and applied
Deleted: r
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007