Appeal No. 1997-2292
Application No. 08/483,839
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over either
Lefebvre or Geadah.
Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
For all of the reasons expressed by the appellant in the
briefs, and for the additional reasons expressed infra, we
will not sustain any of the rejections.
The examiner has presented a myriad of reasons for
rejecting claims 1 and 2 under the first, the second and the
sixth paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 112. It appears that the
underlying reason for all of these rejections is that the
disclosure does not present the detail circuitry of the
program control circuit 1 and the clock number-detecting
circuit 2 (Figure 1).
At the outset, we agree with the appellant (Brief, pages
9 and 10) that the examiner’s rejection under the sixth
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 is not proper, and it is hereby
reversed.
Turning next to the indefiniteness rejection of claims 1
and 2, we agree with the appellant (Brief, pages 8 and 9) that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007