Appeal 2007-1440
Application 09/920,481
Examiner’s rejection of representative claim 1 based on the collective
teachings of Gifford and Talati.
Likewise, we will sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 2, 4-6,
13, 14, 16-18, 22, 23, 25-27, and 41 as they fall with representative claim 1.
See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
We will also sustain the Examiner's rejections under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) of (1) claims 3, 15, 24 over the teachings of Gifford in view of
Talati and further in view of APA; (2) claims 7, 19, and 28 over the
teachings of Gifford in view of Talati and further in view of Joseph; and (3)
claims 8-12, 20, 21, 29, and 30 over the teachings of Gifford in view of
Talati and further in view of Schuster. We find that (1) the Examiner has
established at least a prima facie case of obviousness for these claims on
Pages 7-11 of the Answer, and (2) Appellant has not persuasively rebutted
the Examiner's prima facie case. In this regard, Appellant merely noted that
the additional references to APA, Joseph, and Schuster fail to cure the
deficiencies of Gifford and Talati in connection with the previous arguments
raised with respect to the independent claims (Br. 9). The rejection is
therefore sustained.
DECISION
We have sustained the Examiner's rejections with respect to all claims
on appeal. Therefore, the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-30 and 41
is affirmed.
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).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013