Appeal No. 2002-1822
Application No. 09/197,164
19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kanjo in
view of Narkon will likewise not be sustained.
The next rejections for our review are those directed to
dependent claims 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Wallace, Narkon and Bogue, and alternatively
Daugherety '819, Narkon and Yamazumi. We have reviewed the
teachings of both Bogue and Yamazumi, and find that we are in
agreement with appellant's assessment of these rejections as set
forth on pages 14-16 of the brief. Moreover, even if combined as
urged by the examiner, there is nothing in the teachings of Bogue
and Yamazumi which makes up for or otherwise provides response
for the deficiencies in the basic combinations of Wallace and
Narkon, and Daugherety '819 and Narkon, as noted above. Thus,
both of these rejections will also not be sustained.
Since we are unable to sustain any of the rejections posited
by the examiner, it follows that the examiner's decision to
reject claims 1 through 31 of the present application under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
99
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007