Appeal No. 2003-0816
Application No. 09/693,254
CITED PRIOR ART
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies on the following
references:
Banker 4,330,338 May 18, 1982
Conte et al. (Conte) 5,422,123 Jun. 06, 1995
Bar-Shalom et al. (WO’ 066) WO 89/09066 Oct. 05, 1989
(Published PCT International patent application)
The Examiner has rejected claims 1, 2, 4 to 7, 9 to 14, 16 to 27 and 35 to 54
as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Conte,
WO ‘066 and Banker.
DISCUSSION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and applied prior art,
including all of the arguments advanced by both the Examiner and Appellant in
support of their respective positions. This review leads us to conclude that the
Examiner’s § 103 rejection is not well founded. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468,
1471-72, 223 USPQ 785, 787-88 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007