Appeal No. 2003-0587
Application No. 09/533,514
C) the examiner’s rejection of claims 23 and 37 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based Wayne has been sustained as to claim 23,
but not with regard to claim 37;
D) the rejection of claim 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based
on Golantsev has been sustained;
E) the examiner’s rejection of claim 25 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Westerling in view of Leibach
has been sustained;
F) the rejection of claim 39 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Raudat in view of Leibach has not been
sustained;
G) the examiner’s rejection of claims 27, 28 and 40 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Westerling alone
has not been sustained;
H) the rejection of claims 27, 28 and 40 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Westerling in view of Hjalmer
has been sustained with respect to claims 27 and 28; but not with
regard to claim 40; and
22
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007