Appeal 2007-2110
Application 10/223,408
the Examiner’s rejection of claims 15-18 and 24-26 as unpatentable over Moreno,
Ogilvie, and Stephens.
Rejection of claim 19 as unpatentable over Moreno, Ogilvie, Stephens, and Kakuta
Appellants contend that Kakuta fails to overcome the alleged deficiencies of
Moreno, Ogilvie, and Stephens presented with respect to claim 16, from which
claim 19 depends (Appeal Br. 34). We find Appellants’ arguments with regard to
independent claim 16 unpersuasive for those reasons presented supra. As such, we
sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 19 as unpatentable over Moreno, Ogilvie,
Stephens, and Kakuta.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
We conclude that Appellants have not shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting claims 1-6 and 21-23 as unpatentable over Moreno, Maloney, and
Ogilvie, claims 7-10 and 12-14 as unpatentable over Moreno and Ogilvie, claim 11
as unpatentable over Moreno, Ogilvie, and Hall, claims 15-18 and 24-26 as
unpatentable over Moreno, Ogilvie, and Stephens, and claim 19 as unpatentable
over Moreno, Ogilvie, Stephens, and Kakuta.
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) to reject claims 1-30 is
affirmed.
25
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013