Appeal 2007-2188
Application 10/150,667
§ 103(a) Rejection over Prevorsek, Fels and Price
Appellants do not present any additional arguments with respect to
separately rejected dependent claims 13, 14, 45, and 46 other than to note
their position that Price does not remedy any deficiencies in the Examiner’s
rejection of the independent claims 1 and 33 over Prevorsek and Fels. For
the reasons stated above with respect to the Examiner’s first stated rejection,
it follows that we shall also sustain the obviousness rejection of dependent
claims 13, 14, 45, and 46 over Prevorsek in view of Fels and Price.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1, 3-12, 15, 16, 33, 35-
44, 47-53, 75, and 76 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Prevorsek in view of Fels; and to reject claims 13, 14, 45, and 46 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Prevorsek in view of Fels and
Price is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013