Appeal No. 1996-1127
Application No. 07/975,587
claimed invention possesses unexpectedly superior results compared with the closest
prior art. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner's decision rejecting claim 1 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Branan.
As previously indicated, claims 2 through 8 fall together with claim 1.
One further point warrants attention. Notwithstanding the representation in
appellants' brief (Paper No. 14, mailed June 28, 1995, paragraph bridging pages 1 and
2) that "there are no related appeals or interferences", we invite attention to Appeal No.
96-0150 in Application No. 07/969,244. In that related appeal, another merits panel of the
Board reversed the examiner's rejection of claims 1 through 10 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. The available records in the Patent and Trademark Office indicate that a Notice of
Allowance issued June 2, 1999, in the related appeal. In any further prosecution of the
subject matter of this appeal, we recommend that the examiner reevaluate patentability in
light of the subject matter disclosed and claimed in Application No. 07/969,244. For
example, the examiner should consider entering rejections under 35
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007