Appeal No. 2005-2760
Application 09/915,963
deterrence to employing Ogot’s teaching to Wicks because of
Wicks’ broadband antenna “which works best with a relatively
large ground plane,” as argued by appellant at page 11 of the
principal brief.
Accordingly, we will sustain the rejection of claims 10, 19,
21, and 23-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
We also note that, in our view, Ogot provides for the
deficiencies of Wicks noted supra with regard to our reversal of
the rejection of claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11, 13, and 15-18 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 (e). However, there is no rejection of these
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 before us.
Accordingly, we make the following new ground of rejection
under 37 CFR § 41.50(b):
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Wicks in view of Ogot for the reasons supra,
anent the rejection of claims 10 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Ogot clearly provides for the deficiencies of Wicks with regard
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007