Appeal 2007-2374
Application 10/038,545
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The Examiner has established the obviousness of claims 1 and 5. The
obviousness of claims 2 to 4 and 6 to 12 has been established by the
Examiner because Appellant has not presented any patentability arguments
for these claims apart from the arguments presented for claims 1 and 5.
DECISION
The obviousness rejection of claims 1 to 12 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013