Appeal No. 95-1545 Application 07/842,329 ...” as required by the claims on appeal. Accordingly, for the reasons given above, the examiner’s rejection of claims 1- 6 and 13-15 for obviousness over Battaglia in view of Zick or Cosentino is reversed. Since we do not find that Afromowitz, Boeke or Fjeldly cures the defects in Battaglia, Zick and Cosentino, we also reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 8-11 over Battaglia in view of Zick or Cosentino, Afromowitz and/or Boeke or Fjeldly. 8Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007