Appeal No. 2004-2354
Application No. 09/923,991 Page 3
Claims 1 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Jordan. Claims 4 and 23 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jordan.
Claims 2 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Jordan in view of Courtney. Claims 5, 6, 11,
13, 15 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Jordan in view of Moore. Claims 7-10 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Jordan in view of Moore and Jensen. Claim 22 stands rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jordan in
view of Sobel. Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Jordan in view of Moore and Sobel.
Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Jordan in view of Moore and Weller. Claim 24
stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Jordan in view of Weller.
We refer to the briefs and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by appellant and
the examiner concerning the issues before us on this appeal.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007