Appeal No. 2006-1194
Application No. 10/601,204
embrace intervening circuit elements. In an electronic circuit, every node is in fact broadly
“electrically connected” to every other node.
As to the rejection of independent claim 7 and its respective dependent claims under
35 U.S.C. § 102, appellant’s Brief has not argued the merits of the examiner’s rejection of this
claim. As such, the rejection is sustained. Correspondingly, appellant’s remarks with respect to
the second stated rejection of various dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 at the bottom of
page 8 of the Brief in effect argues the alleged patentability of parent independent claim 7 and
does not argue against the combinability of Connell to Mosinskis as argued by the examiner.
As to the rejection of independent claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102, appellant has not amended
this claim in such a manner as to exclude the examiner’s interpretations of it within 35 U.S.C.
§ 102.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner rejecting various claims on appeal
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007