Appeal No. 96-0974
Application 08/024,299
Lebby’s disclosed apparatus, failed to satisfy his initial
burden of proof under § 112, ¶ 6 and the PTO Guidelines with
respect to appellants’ means-plus-function claim limitations.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 3 is
reversed, as is the rejection of claim 4, which stands or
falls (in this case falls) therewith.
REVERSED
)
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JOHN C. MARTIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
cc: SUGHRUE, MION, ZINN, MACPEAK & SEAS
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
- 18 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007