Appeal No. 2002-1511
Application No. 09/026,936
of “denying radio communication . . . ,” and the examiner has not identified how the
teachings of Przelomiec remedy that deficiency. Accordingly, we do not sustain the 35
U.S.C. § 103 rejection of any of the claims over Barratt in combination with Przelomiec.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-5, 8-13, 16, and
24-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is reversed, and the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 6, 7, 14, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH L. DIXON ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JD/RWK
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007