Appeal No. 97-3451
Application 08/325,832
the art would simply use Garuts’ new and improved A/D converter
in place of Cheung’s more conventional A/D converter. But that,
however, would not lead to the appellant’s claimed invention as
defined in independent claims 1, 25 and 26.
For the foregoing reasons, we sustain the rejection of
claims 8-13, 14, 17-21, and 22-24. However, we do not sustain
the rejection of claims 1-7, 25, and 26-28.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 8-13, 14, 17-21, and 22-24 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cheung and Garuts is
affirmed.
The rejection of claims 1-7, 25, and 26-28 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Cheung and Garuts is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007