Appeal No. 96-2995
Application 08/383,608
In regard to claim 4, the Examiner has rejected it under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kawana in view of
Bazille, Rakos and Dumond. Here, the Examiner has used the
additional reference, Dumond, to show the feature claimed in
claim 4, namely:"... said visual display is of the dot-matrix
type" [answer, page 6].
Appellant has not made any specific argument regarding
this rejection. We, too, find nothing wrong with the
Examiner's
position on claim 4. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of
claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Kawana in view of Bazille, Rakos and Dumond.
In conclusion, we affirm the Examiner’s final rejections
of claims 1 through 5, 8, 9 and 11.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007