Appeal 2007-0490
Application 10/095,716
1 amplification methods combine to produce a greater gain. Thus, we find
2 ample evidence of record to support the Examiner’s rejection of claim 8 and
3 the claims grouped with claim 8, claims 5 through 7.
4
5 CONCLUSION
6 Appellants have not demonstrated error in the Examiner’s rejections
7 of claims 1 through 9 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and the Examiner’s
8 rejections of claims 10 through 12, and 14 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. §
9 103(a). Accordingly, we sustain these rejections. The decision of the
10 Examiner is affirmed.
11 AFFIRMED
12
13
14 hh
15
16 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP/
16 LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC
17
17 595 SHREWSBURY AVENUE
18
18 SHREWSBURY, NJ 07702
19
20
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Last modified: September 9, 2013