Appeal No. 95-1744
Application 08/216,543
1057 (1968)).
None of the other references relied on by the examiner
(i.e., Halstead, McNeil and Lunas) even have a “nasal conduit
free end,” much less one being in “the general configuration of a
hollow triangular prism” as set forth in independent claim 8.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner to
reject claims 8-14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the
combined teachings of Exhibit A, Halstead, McNeil and Lunas is
reversed.
REVERSED
HARRISON E. McCANDLISH )
Senior Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JAMES M. MEISTER ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD )
Administrative Patent Judge )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007