Appeal No. 1999-0168
Application No. 08/540,349
We have also reviewed the disclosure of the Edgington
reference applied by the Examiner in combination with Cutler
to address various features of several dependent claims. We
find nothing in Edgington which would overcome the innate
deficiencies of Cutler discussed supra.
In view of the above discussion, it is our view that,
since all of the limitations of the appealed claims are not
taught or suggested by the prior art, the Examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness. Accordingly,
the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of independent claims 1 and
8, as well as claims
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007