Appeal No. 2001-0588
Application No. 08/609,308
Accordingly, and for the reasons supra, we will not sustain the rejection of claim
12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
For the reasons supra, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 6-8 and 11-
13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Hashimoto in view of Cheah.
With regard to the rejection of claims 3, 4 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Hashimoto, Cheah and Kramer, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 3 and 4
because Kramer does not provide for the deficiencies, noted supra, with regard to claim
1.
We also note that the examiner indicates [answer-page 7] that claims 9, 10, 14
and 15 are directed to allowable subject matter. However, claim 16, which is not
included in this list, depends from claim 15. Thus, if claim 15 is allowable, so, too, must
be claim 16. Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claim 16 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 because the examiner clearly did not intend for this claim to be rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over the same references applied against its parent claim when the
subject matter of that parent claim has been allowed by the examiner.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007