Appeal 2007-1220
Application 10/688,033
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
was made.
CONCLUSION
We affirm the Examiner’s § 103 rejections of claims 24, 35, 37-40,
47, and 49 based on the analysis above. Pursuant to § 1.37(c)(1)(vii)(2006),
we also affirm the § 103 rejection of claims 25-34, 36, 41-46, and 48, as
these claims were not argued separately.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv)(2006).
AFFIRMED
Ssc
FISH & RICHARDSON PC
P.O. BOX 1022
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440-1022
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Last modified: September 9, 2013