Appeal No. 95-4206
Application No. 07/803,465
Dodson 4,702,154 Oct. 27,
1987
Varaiya et al. (Varaiya) 4,754,397 Jun.
28, 1988
Sarraf 4,926,291 May 15,
1990
Takahashi et al. (Takahashi) 5,173,819 Dec.
22, 1992
(effective filing date Oct. 2, 1989)
Claims 1 through 24, 26 through 37 and 39 through 47
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103. As evidence of
obviousness, the examiner cites Sarraf with regard to claims 1
through 24, 26 through 33, 36, 37 and 39 through 47, adding
Varaiya with regard to claims 34 and 35. In the new grounds
of rejection entered in the principal answer, the examiner now
holds claims 1 through 4, 11 through 19, 29 through 36 and 40
through 48 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, first and second
paragraphs, as being directed to a nonenabling disclosure and
as being indefinite. Claims 5 through 7 and 10 also stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as anticipated by Takahashi.
Moreover, claims 1 through 24, 26 through 33, 36, 37 and 39
through 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable
over Sarraf in view of Dodson and claims 34 and 35 stand
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007