Appeal No. 2001-1481
Application No. 09/088,976
we find that each and every limitation of instant claims 2 and 4
is not disclosed or suggested by Saito, we will sustain the
rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) but we will not
sustain the rejection of claims 2 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b).
Since claim 3 depends from claim 2, we also will not sustain the
rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. 103.
The examiner’s decision 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
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-8–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007