Appeal 2007-3787
Reexamination 90/006,642
Patent 4,944,298
1 switched mode, is apparently absent in both Fearnot and Nappholz.
2 Combining teachings from Fearnot and either Berkovits or Sholder is not
3 without purpose or unnecessary. Neither is combining teachings from
4 Nappholz and either Berkovits or Sholder.
5 G. Conclusion
6 The rejection of claims 23 and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
7 paragraph, as without written description in the specification is affirmed.
8 The rejection of claims 6, 14, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
9 unpatentable over Fearnot is dismissed.
10 The rejection of claims 6, 14, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
11 unpatentable over Fearnot and either Berkovits or Sholder is affirmed.
12 The rejection of claims 6, 14, 17, 21/6, 22/6, 23/6, 24-26, 27/17, and
13 28/17 over Nappholz and either Berkovits or Sholder is affirmed.
14 No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
15 this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) (1)(iv)(2005).
AFFIRMED
SD
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013