Appeal No. 2001-2612 Page 9
Application No. 09/479,741
The rejection of claims 1-20 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is
not sustained.
The rejection of claims 1-6 and 84 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated
by Frank is not sustained.
The rejection of claims 7, 9, 10-12, 13-20 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Frank is not sustained.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
4 We note an inconsistency in the rejections, in that claim 8 was included in the Section 102
rejection as being anticipated by Frank even though it depends from claim 7, which stands rejected as
being unpatentable over Frank. Since we have concluded not to sustain either of the rejections owing to
the failure of Frank to disclose or teach the subject matter recited in claim 3, from which claims 7 and 8
both depend, the conclusion is inescapable that claim 8 is neither anticipated nor rendered unpatentable
by Frank.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007