Ex Parte Kasahara et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Oct 6, 2008

11097133 (B.P.A.I. Oct. 6, 2008)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte YASUHIRO KASAHARA,
YUKA HONDA,
and
KIHURA SUNAKO,
Appellants
____________________

Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,1331
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Decided: October 06, 2008
____________________

Before CAROL A. SPIEGEL, ERIC GRIMES, and JEFFREY N.
FREDMAN, Administrative Patent Judges.

SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL

I. Statement of the Case

1 Application 11/097,133 ("the 133 application"), Body Fat Measurement
Apparatus, filed 4 April 2005, claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119 of
Japanese application 2004-111349, filed 5 April 2004. The real party in
interest is said to be Tanita Corporation (Corrected Appeal Brief, filed 17
October 2007 ("App. Br."), 1).
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a final rejection of all
the pending claims, claims 1-3 and 5-10. We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM.
The subject matter on appeal is directed to an apparatus that measures
the body fat of a person based on impedance and lateral width of the
subject's abdomen. Claims 1 and 3 are illustrative and read (App. Br. 13-
14):
1. A body fat measurement apparatus
comprising an impedance measurement electrode
system including a pair of current supplying
electrodes and a pair of voltage measurement
electrodes, those electrodes adapted to contact a
peripheral surface of an abdomen of a person
under test to measure an impedance of the
abdomen, on the basis of which an index of body
fat of the person under test is calculated, said
apparatus further comprising:
an electrode support unit;
a lateral width measurement unit; and
an arithmetic unit,
wherein
said electrode support unit supports the
impedance measurement electrode system so that
the respective current supplying electrodes thereof
can contact respective portions of a front surface of
the abdomen of the person under test near left and
right sides of the abdomen, and the respective
voltage measurement electrodes thereof can
contact respective portions of the front surface of
the abdomen between the current supplying
electrodes, such that a region of voltage
measurement extends to muscle tissue for
measuring the impedance of the abdomen,
2
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

said lateral width measurement unit
measures a lateral width of the abdomen of the
person under test, and
said arithmetic unit calculates the index of
body fat of the person under test on the basis of the
impedance of the abdomen and the lateral width.
3. A body fat measurement apparatus
comprising an impedance measurement electrode
system including a pair of current supplying
electrodes and a pair of voltage measurement
electrodes, those electrodes adapted for contact
with a peripheral surface of an abdomen of a
person under test to measure an impedance of the
abdomen, on the basis of which an index of body
fat of the person under test is calculated, said
apparatus further comprising:
an electrode support unit;
an electrode position shift unit; and
an arithmetic unit,
wherein
said electrode support unit has an
arrangement variable to suit a lateral width of the
abdomen to make contact with the left and right
sides of the abdomen, and supports the impedance
measurement electrode system so that the
respective current supplying electrodes thereof can
contact respective portions of a front surface of the
abdomen of the person under test near left and
right sides of the abdomen, and the respective
voltage measurement electrodes thereof can
contact respective portions of the front surface of
the abdomen between the current supplying
electrodes, such that a region of voltage
measurement extends to muscle tissue for
measuring the impedance of the abdomen,
said electrode position shift unit is for
changing the contact positions of the electrodes
according to the dimensions of the abdomen on
the basis of an abdomen lateral width position
3
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

when the electrode support unit is varied to suit
the lateral width of the abdomen to make contact
with the left and right sides of the abdomen, and
said arithmetic unit calculates the index of
body fat of the person under test on the basis of the
impedance of the abdomen and the lateral width.
(Emphasis added to highlight the differences between claims 1 and 3.)
The Examiner has rejected (i) claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 as unpatentable
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
over Onda;2 (ii) claim 6 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Onda
in view of Hoey;3 and (iii) claim 10 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) over Onda in view of Bjornson4 (Ans.5 2-3).
Appellants have not argued the patentability of any dependent claim
separately from the independent claim it depends on (App. Br. 9, 11, and
12). Therefore, we decide this appeal on the basis of claims 1 and 3, the
only pending independent claims. 37 C.F.R. § 41.67(c)(1)(vii).
Central to deciding whether the claimed invention is anticipated by or
obvious over the prior art is whether Onda discloses or suggests determining
a body fat index based on impedance and abdominal lateral width.
II. Findings of Fact ("FF")
The following findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of
the evidence of record.

2 U.S. Patent Application Publication 2004/0077969 A1, Apparatus for
Measuring Body Fat, published 22 April 2004, by Onda et al. ("Onda").
3 U.S. Patent Application Publication 2002/0072686 A1, Tissue
Discrimination and Applications in Medical Procedures, published 13 June
2002, by Hoey et al. ("Hoey").
4 U.S. Patent 4,097,997, X-ray Calipers, issued 4 July 1978, to Allen L.
Bjornson ("Bjornson").
5 Examiner's Answer mailed 30 January 2008 ("Ans.").
4
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

A. Appellants' 133 application
[1] According to the 133 specification ("Spec." 13:11-27), Figure 1 shows
an embodiment of a body fat measurement apparatus 1 comprising
a body portion 2, an electrode support unit 3, and
left and right arm portions 4a and 4b.
The body portion 2 . . . includes a power
switch 5 for turning the apparatus ON or OFF, a
measurement switch 6 for starting measurement,
and a display unit 10 . . . .
The electrode support unit 3 is designed to
be mounted to a side surface of the body portion 2
and is formed from some flexible member to
provide a curved leaf spring so that one side
thereof that is to be contact[ed] with [the] front
surface of [the] abdomen . . . is directed inwardly. .
. . An impedance measurement electrode system 9
including a pair of current supplying electrodes 7a
and 7b and a pair of voltage measurement
electrodes 8a and 8b is provided near both end
portion[s] of the electrode support unit 3. In
particular, the pair of voltage measurement
electrodes 8a and 8b is positioned between the pair
of current supplying electrodes 7a and 7b.

Figure 1 of the 133 application is reproduced below:
5
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

{Figure 1 of the 133 application shows a top view of a body fat
measurement apparatus when it is in use.}

[2] The apparatus shown in Figure 1 also includes a sliding mechanism to
move the arm portions 4a and 4b in left and right directions,
respectively, by equal distances from body portion 2, such that
contacting the left and right arm portions 4a and 4b with the left and
right sides of a person's abdomen, respectively, positions body portion
2 at the center of the front surface of the person's abdomen and
positions the impedance measurement electrode system 9
symmetrically about the center of the abdomen in left-and-right
direction (Spec. 14:5-16).
[3] Power switch 5, measurement switch 6, and display unit 10 are
connected to controller unit 11 (Spec. 15:9-10).
[4] Controller unit 11 includes arithmetic unit 15 which calculates
impedance value and index of body fat (Spec. 14:22-30).
6
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

[5] Controller unit 11 also includes encoder unit 16 which measures the
"lateral width of the abdomen" by measuring the side-to-side distance
arm portions 4a and 4b are moved by the sliding mechanism of body
portion 2 (Spec. 15:1-8).
[6] The 133 specification also describes a second embodiment wherein
instead of the flexible electrode support unit 3 of
the first embodiment [shown in Figure 1], a rigid
electrode support unit 31 is provided . . . in which .
. . current supplying electrodes 7a, 7b and . . .
voltage measurement electrodes 8a, 8b are
mounted to an abdomen contact surface of the
rigid electrode support unit 31 via flexible
members 32 which allow said electrodes to freely
be changed in contact direction to [the] abdomen
of a person. . . . (Spec. 22:12-23).
B. Onda
[7] Onda discloses a body fat measuring apparatus comprising two
current supply electrodes, two measuring electrodes, a voltage
measuring unit, and "a computing unit to compute a visceral fat
quantity of the subject according to the measured voltage and a
characteristic quantity representing the size of the subject" (Onda
¶ 12, emphasis added).
[8] "The 'characteristic quantity' . . . is a quantity that reflects the size of
a cross sectional area of the subject, such as . . . a circumferential
length U around a cross section of the subject, a longitudinal width
W1 between the abdomen and back of the subject, or a lateral width
W2 between the flanks of the subject" (Onda ¶ 14, emphasis added).
[9] In an embodiment shown in Figure 7, Onda discloses a body fat
measuring apparatus comprising
7
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

a first electrode group 1 including an electrode and
arranged on the abdominal surface of a subject
(human) with the navel of the subject serving as a
reference position, a second electrode group 2
including an electrode and arranged on the back
surface of the subject, a third electrode group 3
including two electrodes and arranged on the
surface of the subject at an intermediate position
between the first and second electrode groups, a
navel marker 4 to indicate the reference position
where the first electrode group 1 is positioned, a
belt 5 that is substantially inelastic and then is not
stretchable, buckles 6 and 7 to fix the belt 5 around
the body of the subject, and a controller 8 (Onda
¶ 75).
Onda Figure 7 is reproduced below.

{Figure 7 shows a body fat measuring system according to a second
embodiment disclosed in Onda.}

[10] Controller 8 supplies current to electrode groups 1 and 2, measures
voltage generated between the electrodes of group 3, and includes a
computing unit to compute abdominal fat based on the measured
voltage and data entered into an input unit, which may also be part of
controller 8 (Onda ¶ 76).
8
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

[11] Scale marks may be added to belt 5 to measure the waist of a subject
(Onda ¶ 87).
[12] According to Onda (Onda ¶ 89),
[t]o improve measuring accuracy, it is
preferable to fix the electrodes on the belt 5 in such
a way as to substantially equalize the distance L1
between the first and third electrode groups 1 and
3 with the distance L2 between the second and
third electrode groups 2 and 3. Then, the third
electrode group 3 detects a voltage generated at an
intermediate point between the first and second
electrode groups 1 and 2 irrespective of the waist
measurement of the subject.
[13] In a modification of the system shown in Figure 7, an elastic belt 11
may be used instead of inelastic belt 5 (Onda ¶ 96).
[14] Since the distance between electrode groups will vary when using an
elastic belt 11, a distance L0 between the first and second current
supplying electrode groups is preferably â…“ to â…” of an unextended
length of belt 11 and distances L1 and L2 are substantially equal
(Onda ¶ 97; Figure 9).
[15] In another modification of the system shown in Figure 7, the second
and third electrode groups 2 and 3 are movable on rails 12 (Onda ¶
102, Figure 11).
[16] As stated by Onda, "[f]or example, the distance L0 between the first
and second electrode groups is ½ of the waist measurement of a
subject, and a distance L1' between the first electrode group 1 and a
center position of the third electrode group 3 is ¼ of the waist
measurement" (Onda ¶ 102).
9
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

[17] Figure 11 of Onda shows a modification having movable electrode
groups 2 and 3 arranged on rails 12 and is reproduced below:

{Figure 11 of Onda shows a body fat measuring system embodiment having
movable electrode groups.}

[18] In a modification shown in Figure 15, the electrodes in each electrode
group are supported on a thin, preferably transparent, plastic plate 25
that curves along the surface of the body 24. Since the plastic plate 25
is not substantially stretchable, the distance between the electrodes is
kept constant, but the flexibility of plate 25 keeps the electrodes stably
in contact with the surface of body 24 (Onda ¶ 120). Figure 15 is
reproduced below.

{Figure 15 of Onda shows a body fat measuring system embodiment with
movable electrode groups.}
10
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

Other findings of fact follow below.
III. Discussion
Independent claims 1 and 3 stand rejected as anticipated by or,
alternatively, obvious over Onda (Ans. 3).
A. Legal standard
"[A]s an initial matter, the PTO applies to the verbiage of the
proposed claims the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in their
ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the
art, taking into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or
otherwise that may be afforded by the written description contained in the
applicant’s specification.” In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir.
1997).
"A reference anticipates a claim if it discloses the claimed invention
'such that a skilled artisan could take its teachings in combination with his
own knowledge of the particular art and be in possession of the invention.'"
In re Graves, 69 F.3d 1147, 1152 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (quoting In re LeGrice,
301 F.2d 929, 936 (CCPA 1962)). Of course, anticipation "is not an
'ipsissimis verbis' test." In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 832 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
(citing Akzo N.V. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 808 F.2d 1471, 1479
n.11 (Fed. Cir. 1986)). "An anticipatory reference . . . need not duplicate
word for word what is in the claims." Standard Havens Prods. Inc. v.
Gencor Indus., 953 F.2d 1360, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
A claimed invention is not patentable if it would have been obvious to
a person having ordinary skill in the art. 35 U.S.C. § 103(a); KSR Int'l Co. v.
Teleflex, Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007); Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas
11
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

City, 383 U.S. 1 (1966). Facts relevant to a determination of obviousness
include (1) scope and content of the prior art, (2) any differences between
the claimed invention and the prior art, (3) the level of ordinary skill in the
art, and (4) relevant objective evidence of obviousness or nonobviousness.
KSR, 127 S.Ct. at 1734; Graham, 383 U.S. at 17.
B. The Examiner's findings and conclusions
The Examiner found Onda discloses a body fat measurement
apparatus as recited in claims 1 and 3. Specifically, the Examiner found the
apparatus of Onda included an electrode support unit (i.e., belt 5, 11, 25)
supporting an impedance measurement electrode system (i.e., electrode
groups 1, 2, 3), and an arithmetic unit (i.e., controller 8), as required by
claims 1 and 3 (Ans. 3-6). As to claim 1, in particular, the Examiner found
the apparatus of Onda included a lateral width measurement unit (referring
to scale marks which may be added to belt 5 of Onda to measure the waist of
a subject) (Ans. 4). Upon further consideration, the Examiner directed
attention to paragraph 14 of Onda which discloses that a "characteristic
quantity" reflective of the size of a cross sectional area of a subject being
measured includes not only the subject's waist measurement but also "a
lateral width W2 between the flanks of the subject" (Ans. 9-10). As to claim
3, in particular, the Examiner found the apparatus of Onda included an
electrode position shift unit (i.e., buckles 6, rails 12, sliders 17 and 18) (Ans.
5-6). Thus, the Examiner found claims 1 and 3 are anticipated by Onda
(Ans. 3).
Alternatively, the Examiner found Onda discloses the apparatuses of
claims 1 and 3 but for expressly disclosing the current supplying electrodes
are positioned at the flanks of the abdomen while the voltage measurement
12
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

electrodes contact the front of the abdomen (Ans. 7). The Examiner
concluded (Ans. 7-8,original italics):
[S]ince Onda . . . teach[es] current supplying
electrodes . . . located at a back and front surface
of the abdomen while the voltage measurement
electrodes contact[] a side surface thereof . . ., it
would have been obvious . . . to provide an
apparatus . . . with current supplying electrodes . . .
locatable at the front surface of the abdomen at
right and left sides while the voltage measurement
electrodes contact[] the front surface since both
electrode arrangements estimate abdominal body
fat (see abstract). Moreover, it has previously been
held that merely shifting location of parts in not
patentable--See In re Japiske, 181 F. 2d 1019,
1023, 86 USPQ 70, 73 (CCPA 1050).
C. Appellants' position
As to claim 1, Appellants argue Onda does not disclose or suggest the
recited (a) lateral width measurement unit because Onda measures waist
circumference, (b) arithmetic unit because calculating a body fat index based
on abdominal lateral width, rather than waist circumference, would require a
different formula and, therefore, different hardware or software, or (c)
electrode support unit because Onda positions electrodes on the front or on
the front and back of the abdomen, not on the flanks of the abdomen (App.
Br. 6-9). Appellants further argue a lack of motivation to modify the
apparatus of Onda to calculate a body fat index based on abdominal lateral
width given a strong correlation between body fat index and waist
circumference said to be common general knowledge in the art, as
exemplified by Onda.
13
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

Appellants state the apparatus of claim 3 "operates on the same basic
principle as claim 1" (App. Br. 9). However, the apparatus of claim 3
"correlates impedance measured at the sides of the abdomen with body fat
index, thereby eliminating the need to measure the lateral width of the
abdomen, and simplifying data processing" (App. Br. 9). Appellants argue
Onda does not disclose or suggest the electrode support unit or electrode
position unit of claim 3 because Onda does not disclose or suggest placing
electrodes near the left and right sides (flanks) of the abdomen (App. Br. 10-
11).

D. Analysis
As an initial matter, we construe the term "lateral width of the
abdomen" to be the straight line distance between the flanks of the abdomen,
i.e., a side-to-side lateral width. Construing "lateral width of the abdomen"
as the arcing line distance around the abdomen from flank-to-flank (side-to-
side) not only unreasonably equates a one-half waist measurement to an
abdomenal lateral width measurement, but also is inconsistent with the 133
specification and the prior art (FF 5 and 8).
1. Claim 1
Consequently, since the Examiner's finding that the apparatus of Onda
includes a lateral width measurement unit, i.e., belt 5 with scale marks for
measuring the waist of a subject, is based on an erroneous interpretation of
"lateral width measurement," we agree with Appellants that the apparatus of
claim 1 is not anticipated by Onda. However, Onda expressly discloses a
body fat measuring apparatus which computes a body fat index based on
14
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

measured voltage, i.e., impedance, and a characteristic quantity expressly
stated to include not only a subject's waist measurement but also a lateral
width W2 between the flanks of the subject (FF 7-8). Thus, while Onda does
not disclose an apparatus comprising a lateral width measurement unit per
se, Onda expressly suggests an apparatus comprising a unit for lateral width
measurement.
Appellants have not challenged the Examiner's finding that "Bjornson
discloses an apparatus including a lateral width measurement unit that is
variable in left and right directions by an equal distance with respect to the
center of a support unit to suit the lateral width of a chest" (Ans. 9). It also
appears that the Examiner views Onda as suggesting length measurements
"similar to a caliper scale" (Ans. 16). Regardless, both the express
motivation and skill to modify the apparatus of Onda to include a lateral
width measurement unit as required by claim 1 are found in the prior art.
Hence, the argument that Onda does not disclose or suggest the lateral width
measurement unit of claim 1 does not persuade us that an apparatus
including a lateral width measurement unit is nonobvious over Onda.
Similarly, Onda expressly directs one of ordinary skill in the art to
compute a body fat index based on measured voltage (impedance) and
lateral width W2 between the flanks of the subject (abdominal lateral width).
Thus, Onda discloses and suggests the arithmetic unit of claim 1.
In addition, Onda expressly discloses moving the current supplying (1
and 2) and voltage measuring (3) electrodes supported on belt (5, 11, 25)
into desired positions on the belt (FF 12-18). Appellants have not shown
that the movable electrodes supported on the belt of Onda are incapable of
being moved to the desired positions recited in claim 1. To the contrary, in
15
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

one embodiment, Onda teaches that the distance between the current
supplying electrodes is ½ of the waist measurement with the voltage
measuring electrodes midway between the current supplying electrodes (FF
16). We note that Onda prefers arranging the current supplying electrodes
on the back and abdomen of the subject for a more accurate computation of
body fat index (Onda ¶ 64). However, “[i]t is axiomatic that a reference
must be considered in its entirety, and it is well established that the
disclosure of a reference is not limited to specific working examples
contained therein.” In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792, 794 n.1 (CCPA 1982).
Prior art must be considered for everything it would have fairly taught the
artisan. In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750 (CCPA 1976). Moreover, the
teaching of a reference should not be limited to its preferred embodiments.
In re Burckel, 592 F.2d 1175, 1179 (CCPA 1979); In re Mills, 470 F.2d 649,
651 (CCPA 1972). Therefore, Onda discloses or suggests an electrode
support unit as recited in claim 1.
Finally, the argument that there is no motivation to modify the
apparatus of Onda to calculate a body fat index based on abdominal lateral
width is belied by Onda's own express disclosure as discussed above.
Namely, Onda expressly discloses a body fat measuring apparatus which
computes a body fat index based on measured voltage, i.e., impedance, and a
characteristic quantity expressly stated to include not only a subject's waist
measurement but also a lateral width W2 between the flanks of the subject
(FF 7-8).
In summary, we reverse the rejection of claim 1 under § 102, but
sustain its rejection under § 103, over Onda.
2. Claim 3
16
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

As stated by Appellants, the apparatus of claim 3 does not require a
lateral width measurement unit (App. Br. 9). Rather claim 3 requires, in
relevant part (App. Br. 14), an electrode support unit and an electrode
position shift unit, wherein
said electrode position shift unit is for changing the
contact positions of the electrodes according to the
dimensions of the abdomen on the basis of an
abdomen lateral width position when the electrode
support unit is varied to suit the lateral width of the
abdomen to make contact with the left and right
sides of the abdomen.
In other words, the wider the abdomen lateral width of a subject, the bigger
the subject, which requires the electrode position shift unit to move the
electrodes on the electrode support unit to maintain the electrodes in the
desired positions on the subject's abdomen.
In one embodiment, Onda teaches keeping the distance between the
current supplying electrodes at ½ of the waist measurement with the voltage
measuring electrodes midway between the current supplying electrodes (FF
16). Thus, given two subjects, "A" having a 32 inch waist and "B" having a
40 inch waist, the current supplying electrodes would be positioned 16
inches apart for "A" and 20 inches apart for "B", with the voltage measuring
electrodes midway between 16 and 20 inches, respectively, for "A" and "B."
Appellants argue "the electrodes' position will not change to be
automatically in a particular place around the abdomen" with Onda's
apparatus, i.e., Onda teaches that its electrodes can be manually moved
(App. Br. 10). Appellants conclude "Onda's belt with movable electrodes
does not have the structure to perform the required function of the recited
17
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

electrode position shift unit of changing electrode positions when the
electrode support unit is adjusted" (App. Br. 10).
As noted by the Examiner (Ans. 20), claim 3 does not require the
electrode position shift unit to reposition the electrodes "automatically" in
response to a variable adjustment of the electrode support unit. Appellants
have not pointed to where the 133 specification defines an electrode position
shift unit to exclude a manually operated unit. Appellants have not shown
that the electrodes supported on the belt (electrode support unit) of Onda are
incapable of being moved by the buckles, rails, sliders (electrode position
shift unit) of Onda to the desired positions recited in claim 3.
In summary, giving claim 3 its broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with its supporting disclosure, we find no structural distinction
between an apparatus within the scope of appealed claim 3 and the apparatus
fairly described by Onda. Consequently, we sustain the rejection of claim 3
under §§ 102 and 103 over Onda.
3. Conclusion
The rejection of (i) claim 1 and claims 2, 5, and 7-9 dependent
thereon, as unpatentable under § 102 over Onda is reversed, (ii) claim 3 as
unpatentable under § 102 over Onda is sustained, (iii) claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9
as unpatentable under § 103 over Onda is sustained, (iv) claim 6 as
unpatentable under § 103 over Onda and Hoey is sustained, and (v) claim 10
as unpatentable under § 103 over Onda and Bjornson is sustained.
IV. Order
Upon consideration of the record, and for the reasons given, it is
ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1, 2, 5,
and 7-9 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Onda is reversed,
18
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claim 3 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Onda is affirmed,
FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Onda is
affirmed,
FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claim 6 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Onda and Hoey is
affirmed,
FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claim 10 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Onda and Bjornson
is affirmed, and
FURTHER ORDERED that no time period for taking any subsequent
action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
19
Appeal 2008-4909
Application 11/097,133

MAT

MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
600 13th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-3096

20