Appeal No. 2006-3182
Application No. 09/883,963
Rejection at Issue
A. Claims 12 through 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
the combination of Lambropoulos, Bates and Ziemer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, the opinion refers to
respective details in the Briefs2 and the Examiner’s Answer.3 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 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 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 Briefs along with
the Examiner’s rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in the rebuttal set forth in the
Examiner’s Answer. After full consideration of the record before us, we do not agree with the
2 Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on March 13, 2006. Appellants filed a Reply Brief on July
17, 2006.
3 The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on May 17, 2006. The Examiner mailed an office
communication on August 11, 2006 stating that the Reply Brief has been entered and considered.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007