Ex parte RAZA et al. - Page 17




                 Appeal No. 98-1457                                                                                      Page 17                        
                 Application No. 08/530,006                                                                                                             


                 appellants' evidence of nonobviousness (i.e., the May 14, 1996                                                                         
                 declaration of Irfan Raza), suffice it to say I have reviewed                                                                          
                 same but find it insufficient to outweigh the above noted                                                                              
                 reference evidence of obviousness.  Accordingly, at the very                                                                           
                 least, the standing § 103 rejection of claim 1 based on                                                                                
                 Crandall, Hynds and Schlechtendahl should be affirmed.4                                                                                






                                                                                                  ) BOARD OF PATENT                                     
                                                                                                  )     APPEALS                                         
                                            LAWRENCE J. STAAB                                     )       AND                                           
                                            Administrative Patent Judge                           )  INTERFERENCES                                      











                          4It should not be inferred from my focus on the rejection                                                                     
                 of claim 1 based on Crandall, Hynds and Schlechtendahl that I                                                                          
                 necessarily agree with the majority that the remainder of the                                                                          
                 examiner’s rejections of the appealed claims should be                                                                                 
                 reversed.                                                                                                                              






Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007