Ex parte RIGOSI et al. - Page 11




          Appeal No. 96-1501                                                          
          Application No. 08/172,517                                                  


          § 103 results from a review of appellants' disclosure and the               
          application of impermissible hindsight.  Thus, we also cannot               
          sustain the examiner's rejection of appealed claims 1 through 3,            
          5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                    
          Matsumoto in view of Walker and Appellants' admitted prior art.             
          We have also considered the additional teachings of the patent to           
          Marzola applied in the further rejection of appealed claim 4                
          under § 103, but we again find nothing therein to cure the                  
          deficiencies noted above.  Consequently, we also cannot sustain             
          the examiner's rejection of appealed claim 4 under 35 U.S.C.                
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto in view of Walker,               
          Appellants0 admitted prior art and Marzola.                                 

















                                          11                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007