Ex Parte HOGGARTH et al - Page 6

                  Appeal No. 2000-1755                                                                                                                    
                  Application No. 08/828,014                                                                                                              


                  Kishimoto and Kannan, we find that the examiner has not established a prima facie                                                       
                  case of obviousness of the claimed invention, and we will not sustain the rejection of                                                  
                  independent claims 1, 4, 12, 13, and 14 and their dependent claims.                                                                     
                                                                  CONCLUSION                                                                              
                           To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-14  under                                                        
                  35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.                                                                                                            

                                                                    REVERSED                                                                              





                                             PARSHOTAM S. LALL                                     )                                                      
                                             Administrative Patent Judge                           )                                                      
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                                                                                   ) BOARD OF PATENT                                      
                                             JOSEPH L. DIXON                                       )     APPEALS                                          
                                             Administrative Patent Judge                           )       AND                                            
                                                                                                   )  INTERFERENCES                                       
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                                                                                   )                                                      
                                             STUART S. LEVY                                        )                                                      
                                             Administrative Patent Judge                           )                                                      
                  JD/RWK                                                                                                                                  




                                                                           6                                                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November  3, 2007