Appeal No. 95-2638
Application 08/022,174
the teachings of Lewis and Bevan, is insufficient to arrive at
the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, the rejection under
35 USC § 103 is also reversed.
Conclusion
In conclusion, for the reasons set forth in the body of
this opinion, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 1
through 5 under 35 USC § 102(b) as anticipated by Lioutas.
Nor do we
sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 9 and 14 through 17
under 35 USC § 103 as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Lioutas, Lewis, and Bevan.
The examiner's decision is reversed.
REVERSED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
WILLIAM F. SMITH ) APPEALS AND
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007