Appeal 2007-1499
Application 10/122,095
Clarification of rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
As noted supra, claims 1-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph, as having an inadequate written description, specifically that
support is not present for the claim limitation “wherein the mobile wireless
device is updated in a manner that is coordinated with a plurality of other
mobile wireless devices for maintaining the performance of the wireless
network.”
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-17, and 19-31 also stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). In explaining the prior art rejections, the Examiner’s
position with regard to the “updating” limitation discussed supra is that,
because the Specification does not support it, “no prior art need be cited to
reject the claimed limitation in question” (Examiner’s Answer 19, 23).
The Examiner is hereby requested to state the legal basis for his
position that a claim limitation asserted to lack support under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112 may be ignored when formulating a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013