Appeal 2007-2189
Application 10/249,909
references that comprise the case of obviousness. In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d
1350, 1357, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1458 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
Accordingly, we reverse the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of claims
17, 18, and 22-26.
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) REJECTION OVER LATVIS IN VIEW OF SURET
AND BROWNLIE
As noted above, the combination of Latvis in view of Suret is based
on impermissible hindsight. Brownlie’s disclosure does not cure the
deficiencies of the Latvis in view of Suret combination.
Accordingly, we reverse the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of claims
1-11, 13-16, 19-21, 27, and 28 over Latvis in view of Suret and Brownlie.
DECISION
We have reversed the § 103(a) rejection of claims 1-11, 13-16, 19-21, 27,
and 28 over Latvis in view of Suret and Brownlie.
We have reversed the § 103(a) rejection of claims 17, 18, and 22-26 over
Latvis in view of Suret.
The decision of the Examiner is REVERSED.
REVERSED
[
cam
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013