Appeal 2007-0600
Application 09/943,535
claim 1 which we did not find persuasive above. Therefore, we will sustain
the rejection of dependent claims 4, 6-8, 11, 15, and 16 since Appellants
have not shown error in the Examiner’s initial showing.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, we have sustained the rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, 9, 10,
and 12-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 102, and we have sustained the rejections of
claims 4, 6-8, 11, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
tdl/ce
Neil A. DuChez
RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
1621 Euclid Avenue, 19th Floor
Cleveland, OH 44115
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: September 9, 2013