Appeal No. 94-0591
Application 07/755,610
formulations, the examiner should determine in the first instance
the patentability of the subject matter appellant claims under
35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the combined teachings of the prior
art herein applied and UK Patent Application GB 2067587.
6. Conclusion
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of Claims 1-9, 11, 12
and 16-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the combined teachings
of Bilton, Wruble, and Babayan.
We remand this case to the examiner to determine the metes
and bounds of the subject matter claimed, and thereafter, to
consider its patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 102 over Wruble’s
disclosure and under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the Bilton,
Wruble, Babayan, and GB 2067587.
- 17 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007