Appeal No. 95-2607
Application No. 07/990,098
nothing and the examiner points to nothing in this patent
evidencing a punch capability of any kind. On the other hand, we
find in the patent disclosure a significant quantity of evidence
that Hein’s device would be incapable of performing any type of
punching function.
For the reasons set forth above and in the briefs, it is
clear to us that the examiner’s § 103 rejection of claims 1
through 6 and 12 over Hein is improper and cannot be sustained.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge)
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
Administrative Patent Judge)
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007