Appeal 2007-1105
Application 09/731,912
1 CONCLUSION OF LAW
2 (1) Appellant has failed to establish that the Examiner erred in
3 rejecting claims 1-3, 5-13, 15-16, 18-21, and 23-45 as being unpatentable
4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Chang and Giljum.
5 (2) Claims 1-3, 5-13, 15-16, 18-21, and 23-45 are not patentable.
6 DECISION
7 The Examiner's rejection of claims 1-3, 5-13, 15-16, 18-21, and 23-45
8 is affirmed.
9 No time for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
10 appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
11
12 AFFIRMED
13 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b)
14
15
16
17
18 tdl/gw
19
20
21
22 GUNNAR G. LEINBERG
23 NIXON PEABODY LLP
24 CLINTON SQUARE
25 P.O. BOX 31051
26 ROCHESTER, NY 14603
27
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: September 9, 2013