Appeal 2006-1454
Application 09/004,524
Patent 5,483,421
of the narrowing amendment as having been surrendered. Appellants have not
shown that further limiting originally filed claims 1 and 7 (which were rejected
based on Soga and Frankeny and cancelled by applicant) by including Soga’s
known encapsulating technique for its intended purpose to achieve an entirely
expected result is a material narrowing of the reissue claims.
IV. DECISION
Upon consideration of the record, and for the reasons given, the decision
rejecting claims 21-25 and 34 under 35 U.S.C. § 251 based on recapture is
affirmed.9
AFFIRMED
ARM
FEM
BRG
ELD
9 Appellants also submit that they are entitled to a decision by the Examiner as to
whether the claims are obvious or not and, if not, the references cited and the way
the references are applied (Br. 6 and Reply Br. 5). We do not review issues
associated with the appropriateness of an Examiner’s decision to not reject claims.
Those issues are properly the subject of petition to The Director.
- 62 -
Page: Previous 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013