Appeal No. 97-0124
Application No. 08/273,672
applied prior art, we also cannot sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 7/5 and 10/2 which depend therefrom.
In conclusion, we have not sustained the rejection of claims
4-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 112 nor the rejection of claims 2, 5, 7/5,
and 10/2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, but we have sustained the
rejection of claims 1, 4, 7/4, 8, 9, and 10/1 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b). Accordingly, the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claims 1, 2, and 4-10 is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
MICHAEL R. FLEMING ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge )
jrg
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007