Appeal No. 97-0628
Application 07/992,428
As for dependent claims 8, 14 and 15, they stand rejected
over the same collection of references plus either Miyamoto or
Hung. Miyamoto and Hung are relied on for the additional
features recited in the dependent claims and do not make up for
the deficiencies of the other references with respect to the
independent claims.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 6-10, 12-20, and 30
cannot be sustained.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16-20 and 30
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Reed in view of
either Chang or Morita, and Biles and Kucera is reversed.
-11-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007