Appeal No. 96-3906
Application No. 08/038,588
According to the examiner, it would have been obvious to
modify Austin's method, per the teachings of Holder, King, and
VanEenam, "because all references are from the same technical
endeavor" (Examiner's Answer, page 7, line 1). That, however,
is not sufficient reason or justification to support the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103. It does not follow, merely
because all references are from the same field of endeavor,
that the cited
Claim 6, therefore, does not "specify a further limitation of
the subject matter claimed." 35 U.S.C. § 112, fourth
paragraph.
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007