Appeal No. 2003-1792
Application No. 09/434,598
For the reasons herein, we find no error in the examiner’s conclusion that the
subject matter of claim 36 is obvious in view of George and Milligan under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) .
CONCLUSION
The rejection of claim 37 under 35 U.S.C. §102(b), as anticipated by George is
affirmed. Claims 34 and 35 fall with claim 37. The rejection of claims 36 under 35
U.S.C. §103(a), as obvious over George in view of Mulligan is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal
may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
)
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
TONI R. SCHEINER )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
DEMETRA J. MILLS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007