Appeal No. 2003-1070
Application 09/021,727
REJECTION AT ISSUES
Claims 30, 34, 38, 41, 43 and 44 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of
Flanagan. Claims 50, 52 through 54, 56 and 57 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harbour. Claim
51 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Harbour in view of Kwang. Claim 55 stands rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harbour in view of
Ehley. Claims 58 and 59 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Harbour in view of Liu. Claims 60
through 62 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Harbour in view Smith. Claims 63 through 66
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Harbour in view of Moorby.
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejection and the arguments of Appellants
as setforth in the briefs1, for the reasons stated infra, we
1 Appellants filed an appeal brief on February 22, 2002. The
(continued...)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007