Appeal No. 2003-1208
Application 09/590,805
first and second devices are connected to power. Claim 6,
therefore, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, written description
requirement.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4-7 and 22-25 over Kalnitsky
in view of the appellants’ admitted prior art is affirmed as to
claims 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7, procedurally reversed as to claim 6, and
reversed as to claims 22-25. The rejection of claim 3 over
Kalnitsky in view of the appellants’ admitted prior art and
Tursky is reversed. The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4-7 and 22-25
over Murdock in view of the appellants’ admitted prior art, and
the rejection of claim 3 over Murdock in view of the appellants’
admitted prior art and Tursky, are reversed. Under the
provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), new grounds of rejection of
claim 6 have been entered.
In addition to affirming the examiner’s rejection of one or
more claims, this decision contains a new ground of rejection
pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1, 1997, by
final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53,131, 53,197 (Oct. 10, 1997),
1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 63, 122 (Oct. 21, 1997)).
37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides, “A new ground of rejection shall not
be considered final for purposes of judicial review.”
23
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007