Appeal No. 2003-0041
Application No. 09/087,528
Keskitalo et al. (Keskitalo) 6,091,788 Jul. 18, 2000
(applicably filed May 23, 1996)
Rejections at Issue
Claims 1-5, 8-10, 12-14, 16, 17, 19-21, 24-28, 31-33, 35-41 and 43-45 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Muszynski in view of
Bazarjani.1
Claims 7, 15, 23, 30 and 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Muszynski and Bazarjani in view of Ganesan.
Claims 6, 22, 29 and 46 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Muszynski and Bazarjani in view of Keskitalo.
Throughout the opinion, we make reference to the briefs2 and to the answer for
the respective positions of Appellants and the Examiner.
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on appeal, the
Examiner’s rejections and the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, for the
reasons stated infra, we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-47 under 35
U.S.C. § 103.
1 Claims 11, 18, 34 and 42 have subsequently been allowed. See page 9 of the Examiner’s
Answer.
2 Appellants filed an appeal brief on February 26, 2002. Appellants filed a reply brief on April 29,
2002. The Examiner mailed out an office communication on August 2, 2002 stating that the reply had
been entered and considered.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007