Appeal No. 2001-2146
Application No. 09/270,588
As a final point, we emphasize that we have considered the merits of the examiner’s
rejection to the extent of the record before us.
The examiner must consider whether there is basis in Liao for each of the limitations in
the claimed subject matter.
This application, by virtue of its "special" status requires an immediate action. MPEP
§ 708.01 (8th ed., Aug. 2001). It is important that the Board be informed promptly of
any action affecting the appeal in this case (e.g., abandonment, issue, reopening prosecution).
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1through 7, 9 through 14, 16 through 26 and 28 through 36
under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Liao in view of Wright and Miyashita is
reversed.
The rejection of claims 8, 15 and 27 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable
over as being unpatentable over Liao in view of Wright and Miyashita and further in view of
Sato is reversed.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED AND REMANDED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007