Appeal No. 2000-0504
Application 08/799,898
Finally, claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Riccio in view of Jones.
For details of these rejections, reference is made to the
Appeal Brief and the Examiner’s Answer.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in
light of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner. As
a result of this review, we have reached the conclusion that
Jones anticipates claims 1 through 3, Jones renders claim 4
prima facie obvious, and that Riccio renders obvious claims 1
through 5. We have further concluded that claims 6 through 9
would have been obvious over Riccio in view of Mahannah.
Likewise, claim 10 would have been prima facie obvious to one
of ordinary skill in view of the teachings of Riccio and
Jones. However, with respect to claims 11 through 17, it is
our conclusion that these claims are so indefinite that the
art cannot be applied, and hence, we enter a rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. Finally, we reverse the
rejection of claims 21 through 23 under section 103 and the
rejection of claims 1-3 under section 112, second paragraph.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007