Appeal No. 1999-2625
Application 08/763,929
Claims 1, 6 and 8 through 10 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Ross.
Claims 1, 6 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Poterack.
Clams 1 through 10, 13, 15 and 17 through 19 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ross in view of Kittelsen and Poterack.
Claims 11, 12 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Ross in view of Kittelsen
and Poterack, and further in view of Lerman.
Reference is made to the appellant’s main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 11 and 13) and to the examiner’s answer
(Paper No. 12) for the respective positions of the appellant
and the examiner with regard to the merits of these
rejections.
Turning first to the 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
rejection, the examiner considers claims 1 through 13, 15 and
17 through 20 to be indefinite because
[i]n the two independent claims 1 and 13, lines
10 and 11, it is unclear how a single “wall” and a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007