Reexamination Control No. 90/005,742
Patent 5,253,341
1 H. The § 112 rejection
2 Claims 94 and 97 stand rejected under § 112, first paragraph, for lack of an enabling
3 disclosure. 3d Action at 72, para. 9; Final Action at 232, para. 11; Answer at 6 (no para.
4 number).33
5 I. The art rejections
6
7 The pending grounds of rejections can be grouped as follows (including citations to the
8 Third Action, Final Action, and Answer):
9 1. Rejections based on Filepp
10
11 • Claims 9-11 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for obviousness
12 over Filepp in view of known practices, as evidenced by The Electronics
13 Engineers' Handbook, the Gale articles, De Maine, Carr, Giltner,
14 Notenboom, and LeGall. 3d Action at 75, para. 14; Final Action at 234,
15 para. 14; Answer at 7-8, para. 2.
16
17 • Claims 9, 10, 14 under § 103(a) over Filepp in view of Row. 3d
18 Action at 79, para. 17; Final Action at 237, para. 17; Answer at 9, para. 3.
19
20 • Claim 11 under § 103(a) over Filepp in view of Giltner. 3d
21 Action at 83, para. 18; Final Action at 241, para. 18; Answer at 12, para.
22 4.
23
24
25
26 2. Rejections based on Yurt
27
28 • Claim 11 under § 103(a) over Yurt in view of Kandell. 3d
33 This ground of rejection, which previously applied against claims 94, 95, 97, and 98,
3d Action at 72, para. 9; Final Action at 232 para. 11, was not repeated as to claims 95 and 98 in
the Answer and is therefore being treated as withdrawn as to those claims. Likewise, the § 112
rejection of claims 95, 98, and 103 for failure to satisfy the written description requirement, 3d
Action at 73-74, paras. 11-12; Final Action at 233-34, paras. 12-13, was not repeated in the
Answer and is being treated as withdrawn.
- 18 -
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007