Appeal 2007-1913
Application 10/299,661
The following rejections` are before us for review.
1. Claims 1-5, 8-11, 13-15, 23-26, 29-36, 39-42, 44-46, 54-57, 60-67, 70-73,
75, 81-84, 87-94, 97-100, 102-104, 112-114, 117-119, and 149-156 are
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Perl in view of
Ammarell.
2. Claims 6, 7, 12, 37, 38, 43, 68, 69, 74, 95, 96, and 101 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Perl in view of Ammarell and further
in view of Cantone.
3. Claims 16, 17, 27, 47, 48, 58, 85, 105, 106, and 115 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Perl in view of Ammarell and further
in view of Gueret ’708.
4. Claims 28, 59, 86, and 116 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Perl in view of Ammarell and further in view of
Montgomery.
5. Claims 18-22, 49-53, 76-80, and 107-111 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Perl in view of Ammarell and further in view
of Gueret ’985.
ISSUE
The issue before us is whether Appellant has shown that the Examiner erred
in rejecting the following claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a): (1) claims 1-5, 8-11,
13-15, 23-26, 29-36, 39-42, 44-46, 54-57, 60-67, 70-73, 75, 81-84, 87-94, 97-100,
102-104, 112-114, 117-119, and 149-156 as unpatentable over Perl in view of
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013