Appeal No. 2002-0366 Page 13
Application No. 08/803,692
that “the language of the claim, the specification and the
prosecution history support a limiting construction[, in which
the steps must be performed in the order written,] in this
case”). From all of the above, we affirm the rejection of claim
27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
We turn next to claims 35-38. We affirm the rejection of
claims 35-38 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the same reasons relied
upon, supra, with respect to claims 21-24.
We turn next to claim 41. We affirm the rejection of claim
41 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the same reasons we relied upon,
supra, with respect to claim 27.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007