Ex parte BERSON et al. - Page 12

          Appeal No. 96-2278                                                          
          Application 08/175,001                                                      


          the obviousness of the claimed invention.  Accordingly, we do               
          not sustain the examiner’s rejection of the claims under 35                 
          U.S.C. § 103 based on the teachings of Senanayake and                       
          Piosenka.                                                                   


          The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-3, 5-8                      
          and 10-15 is reversed.                                                      
          REVERSED                                                                    














          JAMES D. THOMAS                 )                                           
               Administrative Patent Judge     )                                      
                    )                                                                 
                                                  )                                   
                                                  )                                   
                         JERRY SMITH                     ) BOARD OF                   
          PATENT                                                                      
                         Administrative Patent Judge     )   APPEALS AND              
                                                  )  INTERFERENCES                    
                                          12                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November  3, 2007