Appeal No. 2001-0400
Application No. 08/751,624
to benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120). The ‘664 patent therefore appears to be
relevant to the patentability of the instant claims.
Upon return of this case, the examiner should consider the effect of the
‘664 patent on the patentability of the instant claims.
Summary
We reverse the rejection for non-enablement because the examiner’s
position is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. We reverse both
of the obviousness rejections because the cited references do not provide the
requisite motivation to modify their teachings in order to meet the limitations of
the instant claims.
REVERSED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
DEMETRA J. MILLS )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
ERIC GRIMES )
Administrative Patent Judge )
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007