Appeal No. 96-3201
Application 08/177,399
agreed that claims 25 and 26 stand or fall with claim 23, we
note that claims 25 and 26 have not been rejected under § 103
utilizing the Kao reference as evidence of obviousness.
Consequently, we will separate this grouping of claims and
hold that claims 25 and 26 will not fall with claim 23.
For the reasons given above, the rejection of claims 1-
13, 23 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Kao
is affirmed.
SUMMARY
The rejection of claims 1-13 and 23 and 24 as
unpatentable over Kao is sustained.
The rejection of claims 18, 20, 22, 25 and 26 is not
sustained.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007