Appeal 2006-2610
Application 10/362,136
include impregnation. Also, Appellants have not refuted the Examiner's
finding that "the art does not recognize a distinction between coating and
impregnating (In re Marra et al., [329 F.2d 970, 972,] 141 USPQ 221 [,
223-24 (CCPA 1964])" (Answer 9, second paragraph).
In conclusion, based on the foregoing and the reasons well-stated by
the Examiner, the Examiner's decision rejecting the appealed claims is
AFFIRMED.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (effective Sep.
13, 2004; 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (Aug. 12, 2004); 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office
21 (Sep. 7, 2004)).
AFFIRMED
clj
Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP
666 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10103-3198
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: November 3, 2007