Appeal No. 96-0310
Application 08/084,502
USPQ 263, 267 (CCPA 1961); In re Boyer, 363 F.2d 455, 458 n.2,
150 USPQ 441, 442 n.2 (CCPA 1966).
Since we have determined that the invention as broadly
recited in claim 1 is suggested by the teachings of the
applied prior art, and since all the claims stand or fall
together for reasons discussed above, we sustain the rejection
of claims 1-18 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Therefore, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-18
is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
)
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS )
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007