Appeal No. 09/959,009 Page 9
Application No. 08/958,009
The examiner also rejected all of the claims as obvious over the
combination of Shriver, Batzer, Yamamoto, and Cotton. Shriver, Batzer, and
Yamamoto were relied on for the same teachings discussed above. We have
concluded, above, that these references do not support a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to claims 3-6 and 8-12. The examiner cited Cotton
only with regard to a specific limitation of claim 7. Since the cited references do
not render obvious independent claim 3, then a fortiori, they do not render
obvious the claims that depend on claim 3, including claim 7. The rejection over
Shriver, Batzer, Yamamoto, and Cotton is reversed for the reasons discussed
above.
Summary
The examiner has not adequately shown that the prior art would have
suggested the claimed method to those of ordinary skill in the art. The rejections
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are reversed.
REVERSED
Sherman D. Winters )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
William F. Smith )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007