Appeal No. 2006-1625
Application No. 09/915,033
string in a transmitter code to ensure that the code was unique. We can say,
however, that no such prior art exists on this record. Accordingly, we will not
sustain the examiner’s rejection of independent claims 1 and 6. Since we do not
sustain the examiner's rejection of the independent claims, we likewise do not
sustain the examiner's rejection of dependent claims 2, 3, 7, and 8.
In summary, we have not sustained the examiner's rejection with respect
to any of the claims on appeal. Therefore, the decision of the examiner rejecting
claims 1-3 and 6-8 is reversed.
REVERSED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JEAN R. HOMERE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JS/jaj/pgc
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007