Appeal No. 96-0254
Application 08/096,149
(Paper No. 5) in which claims 1 through 7 were canceled and
claim 8 was amended. The Examiner entered this amendment for
purposes of appeal in the Advisory Action mailed to appellant
on January 30, 1995 and as a result, only claims 8-12 remain2
for our consideration in this appeal.
Appellant’s invention relates to a method of using an
undersampling technique to capture, transfer and analyze a
multiple word data string. Claim 8 is a representative of the
subject matter on appeal and a copy of claim 8, as it appears in
the Appendix to appellant’s brief, is attached to this decision.
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in
rejecting appealed claims 8-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is:
Guttag et al. (Guttag) 5,287,100 Feb. 15, 1994
(filed June 27, 1990)
Claims 8-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Guttag.
2While the Advisory Action mailed January 30, 1995
indicates that the after final Amendment filed January 17, 1995
was to be entered, the amendment has not physically been entered
into the record. Appropriate correction is required.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007