Appeal No. 1997-1349
Application 08/520,629
As discussed above in regard to claim 32, we fail to find
a second mounting element coupled to the reverse side of the
display in Kunii’s computer. Therefore, we reverse the
rejection of claims 79 through 82 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Kunii.
Turning to the rejection of claims 24 through 54, 56, 57,
and 79 through 82 under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting, Appellants do not make any
arguments and offer to submit a terminal disclaimer after
allowable claims are indicated. Accordingly, we affirm the
rejection of claims 24 through 54, 56, 57, and 79 through 82
under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type
double patenting.
In view of the forgoing, the decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 32, 33, 46 through 54, and 79 through 82 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. The decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 24 through 31, 34 through 45, 56, and 57 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed. The decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 24 through 54, 56, 57, and 79 through 82 under
the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting is affirmed.
21
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007