Appeal No. 95-3917
Application 07/861,144
second nodes so as to selectively contribute to the value of the passive circuit component according
to the coded logic states on the N inputs.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Merrick 4,546,651 October 15, 1985
Hochschild 4,855,685 August 8, 1989
Kalaf 5,164,620 November 17, 1992
(filed November 26, 1991)
Claims 1-22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing
to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicants regards as their invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 11-12, 14, 17-18, and 20-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Merrick.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hochschild and
Merrick.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 13, 14, 19, 20, and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Kalaf.
OPINION
We affirm-in-part.
Objection to the drawings
The objection to the drawings is an "objection" under 35 U.S.C. § 132, which the Board has no
jurisdiction to review. Such matters are reviewable by petition to the Commissioner. The Board's
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007