Appeal No. 2004-0653
Application No. 09/872,053
We have also reviewed the patents to Dague and Wu applied by
the examiner against certain of the dependent claims on appeal
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). However, we find nothing in these
references that alters our view of the examiner's basic
combination of Furay and Baxter as stated above. Thus, the
examiner's rejection of dependent claims 2, 21 and 29 through 33
as being unpatentable over Furay in view of Baxter and further in
view of Dague; claims 19, 20 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Furay in view of Baxter as applied above,
and further in view of Wu; and claim 34 as being unpatentable
over Furay in view of Baxter and Dague as applied above, and
further in view of Wu, are also not sustained.
88
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007