Appeal 2007-3540
Application 09/946,616
1 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
2 The Appellants have not sustained their burden of showing that the Examiner
3 erred in rejecting claims 1, 11-13, 32, 50-54, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e), as
4 anticipated by, or claims 2-10, 14-30, 33-45, 55, 56, and 58-61 under 35 U.S.C. §
5 103(a) as unpatentable over the prior art.
6 On this record, the Appellant is not entitled to a patent containing claims 1-30,
7 32-45, and 50-61.
8 DECISION
9 To summarize, our decision is as follows:
10 • The rejection of claims 1, 11-13, 32, 50-54, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
11 as anticipated by Bogosian is sustained.
12 • The rejection of claims 2-10, 14-30, 33-45, 55, 56, and 58-61 under 35
13 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Bogosian and Cornelius is sustained.
14 No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal
15 may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
16 AFFIRMED
17
18
19
20
21 hh
22 George Likourezos, Esq.
22 261 Washington Avenue
23
24 St. James NY 11780
19
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Last modified: September 9, 2013