Appeal 2007-1529
Application 10/385,722
rejections of claims 24 and 35 over the combined teachings of EP ‘710, EP
‘901, Kojima, and Bardi.
Under the circumstances recounted above, it is our determination that
the evidence of record for and against a conclusion of obviousness,
reconsidered in light of the respective arguments and evidence advanced by
Appellants and the Examiner, on balance, weighs most heavily in favor of an
obviousness conclusion with respect to the rejections under consideration.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-14, 23, 25-34, and 36
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over EP ‘710 in view of
EP ‘901 and Kojima and to reject claims 24 and 35 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over EP ‘710 in view of EP ‘901, Kojima,
and Bardi 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) (2006).
AFFIRMED
clj
Foley and Lardner LLP
Suite 500
3000 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20007
19
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Last modified: September 9, 2013