Appeal No. 96-0879
Application 08/101,228
conclusion that the differences between the subject matter
recited in claims 1 and 11, and in claims 2 through 10, 12 and
13 which depend therefrom, and the prior art are such that3
the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the
time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill
in the art. Therefore, we
shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
these claims.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
3In the event of further prosecution before the examiner,
the dependencies of claims 12 and 13 should be corrected as
indicated on page 3 in the brief (Paper No. 9).
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007