Ex parte KHOUW et al. - Page 6

          Appeal No. 96-0936                                                          
          Application 08/230,173                                                      


               For these reasons, Castagnos does not provide the factual              
          basis necessary to conclude that the differences between the                
          subject matter recited in claim 8 and the prior art are such                
          that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at               
          the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary                 
          skill in the art.  Therefore, we shall not sustain the                      
          standing 35 U.S.C.                                                          
          § 103 rejection of claim 8, or of claims 10 through 16 which                
          depend therefrom, as being unpatentable over Castagnos.                     







               The decision of the examiner is reversed.                              
                                      REVERSED                                        




                         JAMES M. MEISTER              )                              
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )                              
                                                      )                              
                                                      )                              
                                                      )                              
                         JOHN P. McQUADE               )  BOARD OF PATENT             
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )  APPEALS AND                 
                                         -6-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November  3, 2007