Appeal No. 2000-2254
Application No. 08/746,746
Each of the claims which depends from claim 24 recites a
feature which was argued and considered above. Therefore, we
also sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 25-29 and 31-35
for reasons discussed above.
In summary, we have sustained the examiner’s rejection
with respect to claims 1-12, 24-29, 31-35 and 47, but we have not
sustained the rejection with respect to claims 13-23, 36-40 and
42-46. Therefore, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims
1-29, 31-40 and 42-47 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 )
)
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
STUART S. LEVY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-16-
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007