Appeal No. 95-4134
Application 08/099,090
(identified above as rejections c), d) and e)) will not be
sustained.
To summarize our decision, we note that 1) the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, has not been sustained, 2) the examiner's rejection
of claims 1, 3 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) relying on
Bisberg has not been sustained, 3) the rejection of appealed
claims 13 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. §103 relying on Bisberg
alone has not
been sustained, 4) the rejection of claims 1, 2, 11 and 12
under 35 U.S.C. §103 relying on Garnier and Ciarcia has not
been
sustained, 5) the rejection of claims 1, 5 through 10 and 13
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Woodriff and Ciarcia has not
been
sustained, and 6) the rejection of claims 1, 2 and 14 through
16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 relying on Loudon and Ciarcia has
also not been sustained.
As should be apparent from the foregoing, the decision of
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007