Ex Parte 4944298 et al - Page 2

               Appeal 2007-3787                                                                            
               Reexamination 90/006,642                                                                    
               Patent 4,944,298                                                                            
           1                          Reference Relied on by the Examiner                                  
           2   Nappholz  US 4,429,687   Feb. 7, 1984                                                       
           3   Sholder US 4,856,523   Aug. 15, 1989                                                        
           4   Berkovits US 4,932,406   Jun. 12, 1990                                                      
           5   Neal E. Fearnot, “A Review of Pacemakers That Physiologically Increase                      
           6   Rate:  The DDD and Rate-Responsive Pacemakers,” Progress in                                 
           7   Cardiovascular Diseases, Vol. XXIX, No. 2 145-164  (1986).                                  
           8                                                                                               
           9                            The Rejections on Appeal                                           
          10                                                                                               
          11          The Examiner rejected claims 23 and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first                  
          12   paragraph, as without written description in the specification.                             
          13          The Examiner rejected claims 6, 14, and 17, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                 
          14   unpatentable over Fearnot, and Berkovits or Sholder.                                        
          15          The Examiner rejected claims 6, 14, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                  
          16   unpatentable over Fearnot.                                                                  
          17          The Examiner rejected claims 6, 14, 17, 21/6, 22/6, 23/6, 24-26,                     
          18   27/17, and 28/17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Nappholz, and                   
          19   Berkovits or Sholder.                                                                       
          20   B. Issue                                                                                    
          21          Has the Applicant shown error in the rejection of claims 6, 14, 17,                  
          22   21/6, 22/6, 23/6, 24, 25, 26, 27/17, and 28/17?                                             
          23   C. Summary of the Decision                                                                  
          24          No error has been shown in the rejection of claims 6, 14, 17, 21/6,                  
          25   22/6, 23/6, 24, 25, 26, 27/17, and 28/17.                                                   

                                                                                                          
               2   The “/” symbol designates the particular claim dependency in a multiple                 
               dependent claim.                                                                            
                                                    2                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013