Appeal No. 2006-1240
Application No. 10/075,839
With respect to the rejection of the remaining claims, we
note that the Examiner relies on Avis for additional features
claimed in the other dependent claims. However, the Examiner has
not pointed to any convincing rationale in modifying Avis in order
to overcome the deficiencies of Zhu as discussed above.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
claims 4-7 and 10 over Zhu and Avis.
CONCLUSION
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 1-3, 8, 9 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and
rejecting claims 4-7 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
MAHSHID D. SAADAT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
MDS/rwk
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007