Appeal No. 95-4589
Application 08/042,888
disclosure we can think of no cogent reason why one of
ordinary skill in this art would have been motivated to single
out the disparate teachings of Turner and combine them with
McComb in the manner proposed by the examiner. Accordingly,
we will not sustain the rejection of claims 9, 10 and 17 based
on the combined teachings of McComb, Forrest, Swanson and
Turner.
In summary:
The rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, is reversed.
The rejections of 1-8, 11-16 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 are affirmed.
The rejection of claims 9, 10 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
17
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007