Appeal No. 95-4545
Application No. 08/094220
prior art suggestion that it would be desirable to modify
Sharp as proposed in the rejection.
Because the examiner has not established a prima facie
case of obviousness, we will not sustain the rejection of
Claim 4.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of Claim 1-3 are sustained. The rejection
of claim 4 is not sustained.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007