Appeal No. 2006-2975
Application No. 09/794,742
as being unpatentable over the combination of Roberts and
Nielsen.
B. Claims 1, 3, 11 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over the combination of Roberts, Nielsen
and Kaghazian.
C. Claims 4, 12, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the combination of Roberts, Nielsen and
Giangarra.
D. Claims 8, 16 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the combination of Roberts, Nielsen and
Adapathya.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, the opinion refers to respective details in the Briefs1
and the Examiner’s Answer.2 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 Briefs
1 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on November 23, 2005. Appellants filed a
Reply Brief on April 27, 2006.
2 The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on February 21, 2006. The Examiner
mailed a communication on July 21 2006 indicating that the Reply Brief had
been entered and considered.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007