Appeal No. 2001-2338
Application 08/996,360
Geraci, we have reviewed the patents to both Lofty and Coates,
but find nothing therein which would provide for, or otherwise
render obvious, that which we have found above to be lacking in
the examiner’s asserted combination of Zapf and Geraci. Thus,
the examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 27 and 32 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zapf, Geraci and
Lofty, and the examiner’s rejection of claims 33 through 38 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zapf in view of
Coates and Geraci, will also not be sustained.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007