Appeal No. 95-1545
Application 07/842,329
...” as required by the claims on appeal. Accordingly, for
the reasons given above, the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-
6 and 13-15 for obviousness over Battaglia in view of Zick or
Cosentino is reversed.
Since we do not find that Afromowitz, Boeke or Fjeldly
cures the defects in Battaglia, Zick and Cosentino, we also
reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 8-11 over Battaglia
in view of Zick or Cosentino, Afromowitz and/or Boeke or
Fjeldly.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007