Appeal No. 95-4806
Application No. 08/155,730
viewed the appellant’s disclosure. This, of course, is
impermissible as the basis for a rejection. See In re Fritch,
972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1992):
The rejection is not sustained.4
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
NEAL E. ABRAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LAWRENCE J. STAAB ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
4We acknowledge that these same claims were evaluated in
view of the same references by a panel of this Board in a
decision mailed August 31, 1993, with the opposite result
having been reached. However, we had the benefit of evidence
and arguments presented by the appellant which were not
before the previous panel.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007