Appeal 2007-2130
Application 10/141,222
Examiner’s responsive arguments beginning at page 9 of the Answer as to
what comprises in Taghadoss the claimed collection criteria and collection
instructions in this reference.
Lastly, we turn to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of dependent
claims 8, 16, and 25 in view of the collective teachings of Taghadoss and
Sugihara. Appellants’ remarks at page 14 of the principal Brief and pages 7
and 8 of the Reply Brief do not contest the proper combinability of these
references within 35 U.S.C. § 103 and do not directly contest the Examiner’s
additional reliance upon Sugihara as to certain claimed features in these
dependent claims. Instead, Appellant’s remarks rely for patentability upon
his arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 11, and 20 regarding
their rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Since we have sustained each of the three separately stated rejections
of the claims on appeal, the decision of the Examiner rejecting the respective
claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, and 103 is affirmed. Therefore, the
decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013