Appeal No. 1997-2008
Application No. 08/270,931
Nysen et al. (Nysen II) 4,734,698 Mar. 29,
1988
Claims 1 through 43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Nysen I, Nysen II, or Skeie in view
of Schwartz.
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 11,
mailed September 19, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'
Brief (Paper No. 9, filed August 22, 1996) for appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1
through 43.
Claim 1 recites a system including "a passive apparatus
to be interrogated by radio and used as a measuring sensor,"
which includes two passive surface wave structures defining a
sensor element and a reference element. Skeie, Nysen I, and
Nysen II each discloses a passive interrogator label system.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007