Appeal No. 96-1904
Application 08/164,854
the same ground, and reversed the rejection of claim 22 on the
same ground; and
affirmed the rejection of claims 10, 13, 16, and 19
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over McCall, Lahr,
Rader, and Goldstein in view of the IBM reference, Leipzig,
Louis, and Hagelstein.
Additionally, we have introduced a new rejection of
claim 22 pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
The decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
In addition to affirming the examiner’s rejection
of one or more claims, this decision contains a new ground of
rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b) (amended effective
Dec. 1, 1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131,
53,197 (Oct. 10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office
63, 122
26
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007