Appeal No. 2006-2752
Application No. 10/309,007
D. Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the combination of Silvertown and Ishida.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, the opinion refers to respective details in the Appeal
Brief1 and the Examiner’s Answer2. Only those arguments actually
made by Appellants have been considered in this decision.
Arguments that Appellants could have made but chose not to make
in the Brief have not been taken into consideration. See 37 CFR
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(eff. Sept. 13, 2004).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the Examiner’s
rejections, the arguments in support of the rejections and the
evidence of anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the
Examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration Appellants’ arguments set
forth in the Appeal Brief along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejections and arguments in the rebuttal set forth
in the Examiner’s Answer.
1 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on November 30, 2005.
2 The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on February 3, 2006.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007