Appeal No. 96-0254 Application 08/096,149 (Paper No. 5) in which claims 1 through 7 were canceled and claim 8 was amended. The Examiner entered this amendment for purposes of appeal in the Advisory Action mailed to appellant on January 30, 1995 and as a result, only claims 8-12 remain2 for our consideration in this appeal. Appellant’s invention relates to a method of using an undersampling technique to capture, transfer and analyze a multiple word data string. Claim 8 is a representative of the subject matter on appeal and a copy of claim 8, as it appears in the Appendix to appellant’s brief, is attached to this decision. The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting appealed claims 8-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is: Guttag et al. (Guttag) 5,287,100 Feb. 15, 1994 (filed June 27, 1990) Claims 8-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Guttag. 2While the Advisory Action mailed January 30, 1995 indicates that the after final Amendment filed January 17, 1995 was to be entered, the amendment has not physically been entered into the record. Appropriate correction is required. 2Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007