Appeal No. 2000-2029
Application 09/012,530
been fairly derived from Fonger and Toye would not have made the
subject matter as a whole of claim 1 on appeal obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant’s invention,
we must refuse to sustain the examiner’s rejection of that claim
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). It follows that the examiner's
rejection of dependent claims 2 through 5 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) based on Fonger and Toye will also not be sustained.
In summary, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1
through 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Fonger and Toye is
reversed, while the examiner’s decision to reject claims 6
through 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Toye is
affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007