Appeal 2007-0278
Application 10/042,047
THE REJECTIONS
The following rejections are on appeal before us:
1. Claims 6, 12, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description
requirement.
2. Claims 1-3, 7-9, 13-15, 19-22, 25-30, 33-38, 41, and 42 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Shamoon.
3. Claims 4-6, 10-12, 16-18, 24, 32, and 40 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings of
Shamoon in view of Nicolas.
4. Claims 23, 31, and 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Shamoon in view of
Mitchell.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the Examiner, we
make reference to the Brief and the Answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
Only those arguments actually made by Appellants have been
considered in this decision. It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the evidence relied upon supports the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1, 2, 4-8, 10-14, 16-20, 22-28, 30-36, and 38-42, but does not support
the Examiner’s rejection of claims 3, 9, 15, 21, 29, and 37. Accordingly, we
affirm-in-part. In addition, we have sua sponte set forth new grounds of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013