Appeal No. 1996-4190
Application 08/311,710
8 equally applies here. Consequently, the obviousness
rejection of claims 10 to 15 over Sun or Stefansky also falls
for the same reasons. In conclusion, we reverse the
Examiner’s final rejection of claims 8 to 9 under 35 U.S.C. §
102 over Sun or Stefansky. Further, we reverse the
obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 of claims 10 to 15 over Sun or Stefansky.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
PARSHOTAM S. LALL ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
ANITA PELLMAN GROSS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Sughrue, Mion, Zinn, MacPeak & Seas
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20037-3202
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007