Appeal No. 95-3498
Application 08/176,330
through 7, 9, 12, 13, 15 through 21 and 23 through 25 have
been canceled.
The invention relates to a process controller having a
plurality of modular input/output units.
The only independent claims 8 and 10 present in the
application are reproduced in Appendix A of this decision.
The reference relied on by the Examiner is as follows:
Shah et al. (Shah) 4,589,063 May 13, 1986
Claims 8, 10, 11 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Shah and the admitted prior
art. Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or
the Examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer2
for the details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
agree with the Examiner that claims 8, 10, 11 and 22 are
properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Appellants filed an appeal brief on December 1, 1994. We will refer to2
this appeal brief as simply the brief. Appellants filed a reply appeal brief
on February 21, 1995. We will refer to this reply appeal brief as the reply
brief. The Examiner stated in the Examiner’s letter dated March 2, 1995 that
the reply brief has been entered and considered but no further response by the
Examiner is deemed necessary.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007