Appeal No. 96-1919
Application 08/097,438
been so modified is not controlling. It has not been shown that concepts contained in Truchard would
have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art the above subject matter defined in claim 4. The
reference has not been shown in any way as relating to the counting of unprocessed events or the
decrementing from a count of unprocessed events those events which have been processed.
Whereas the examiner considers that his positions with respect to claims 1 and 4 alone are
sufficient to sustain the rejection of claim 15 over Truchard, and we have found that the rejection of
claims 1 and 4 cannot be sustained, we will not sustain the rejection of claim 15.
Whereas the rejection of independent claim 4 over Truchard will not be sustained, the
examiner’s rejection of claims 5-8, which depend therefrom, will not be sustained.
REVERSED
STANLEY M. URYNOWICZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LEE BARRETT ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
MICHAEL R. FLEMING )
Administrative Patent Judge )
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007