Appeal No. 95-5069
Application No. 08/202,055
and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as based on a
non-enabling disclosure.
Respecting the rejection of claims 1, 4, and 5 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures
of Jones, Chan, and Fleet, we agree with appellants (amended
Appeal Brief, January 24, 1997) that this rejection relies on
the impermissible use of hindsight. We therefore reverse the
examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In conclusion, we do not sustain the prior art rejection
or the non-prior art rejection of claims 1, 4, and 5. The
examiner's decision rejecting these claims is reversed.
REVERSED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
WILLIAM F. SMITH ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
HUBERT C. LORIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007