Appeal No. 1998-0343
Application 08/439,209
Claims 20-22 are separately argued by appellant. As
noted above, these claims depend from allowed claim 1.
Therefore, the examiner’s rejection of these claims is clearly
inappropriate.
In summary, the examiner’s rejection of the appealed
claims is sustained with respect to claims 4-6, 8, 9, 16, 17,
19, 23-25, 28-31 and 33, but is not sustained with respect to
claims 18, 20-22 and 32. Therefore, the decision of the
examiner rejecting claims 4-6, 8, 9, 16-25 and 28-33 is
affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ANITA PELLMAN GROSS )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007